Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
On the one hand, due to the small sample size of this study and moreover, the short follow-up (only 1 year after loading), it would be hazardous to conclude that the placement of NDIs to support fixed prostheses in posterior mandible is a predictable treatment modality. In order to draw more reliable conclusions, we need to wait for longer follow-ups, since it may be possible that after several years of function, NDI implants might start to fail due to the reduced available bone-implant contact area or to reduce resistance to fatigue. The placement in the posterior mandible of 2.75 mm diameter implants, as well as 3.25 mm ones, must always be splinted with a bridge, placing one implant for each missing tooth. The placement of a NDI implant in a single molar crown is not recommended. Splinting multiple implants has been reported to minimize the lateral force on the prosthesis, to enhance force distribution, and to reduce the stress on the implants [10]. Thus, splinting of NDI implants would protect the implants from excessive loading and prevent implant/abutment screw fracture. Necessary measures should be taken to minimize off-axis forces like reduction in occlusal table and cusp inclines.
The main limitation of the present study is the small sample size. In addition, a 1-year follow-up is too short to make definitive statements on the predictability of the treatment option tested. Longer follow-up periods and larger sample size are needed, and this trial is currently ongoing.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Background : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Background : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Methods : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Methods : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Results : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Results : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Conclusions : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- References : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- References : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Author information : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Ethics declarations : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Rights and permissions : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- About this article : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 1 Features of the subjects included in the study : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124) : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 3 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 4 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals in different implants diameters groups (2.75 and 3.25 mm) : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Fig. 1. Characteristics of the implants used in the study: a external macro-design of JDIcon Ultra S, 2.75 mm diameter implant and b external macro-design of JDEvolution S, 3.25 mm diameter implant : Narrow implant
- Fig. 2. Case 1: Example of one case involved in the study. a Preoperative view of a partial edentulism in posterior mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was 4 mm. c Four narrow diameter implants were placed and left to a nonsubmerged healing. d Baseline periapical radiograph. e Buccal vieew of the final metal ceramic restoration. f Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading : Narrow implant
- Fig. 3. Example of another case involved in the study. a Preoperative view –premolars and molars are missing in left mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was around 4 mm. c Baseline periapical radiograph. Four narrow diameter implants were placed to restore the area. d Buccal view of the final full-contour zirconia restoration. e Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading : Narrow implant