Result : Study of implants (3)|palmerah.implantgigi.com

Result : Study of implants (3)

author: David French, H Michelle Grandin, Ronen Ofec | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID

3.3.3 Implant design

Pairwise comparisons for CBL at the start between the four implant design groups revealed a similarity between standard and standard plus implants as well as between bone level and tapered effect implants (Figure 2C). However, a significant difference (P value<0.01) was seen at the start between the two pairs with a greater mean loss observed for bone level and tapered effect implants.

3.4 Surgically related risk indicators

3.4.1 Immediate loading

A significant difference for mean CBL at the start with a significant main effect and a non‐significant interaction with time was observed as a function of loading time (Figure 3A). Loading within 48 hours related to greater CBL but there was no difference between groups.

3.4.2 Bone defect

A significant increase in MBL was associated with implants inserted into bone with a defect compared with native bone (Figure 3B). A significant difference was already present at the start, with a greater mean CBL for implants inserted into a bone defect site as well as a significant main effect and interaction effect (P value<0.01).

3.5 The prevalence of mucositis and peri‐implantitis at implant and patient level

Tables 2 and 3 (see also supplementary Figs. 2 and 3 in online Journal of Periodontology) present the results at the implant level according to the strict and relaxed criteria. The number of healthy implants decreased over time. Using the strict criterion, the prevalence of peri‐implantitis increased from 0.4% at 2 to 3 years to 7.7% by 8 to 10 years (Table 2). The prevalence according to the relaxed criteria were lower (Table 3) showing only 5.9% at 8 to 10 years. At the patient level the prevalence of peri‐implantitis at 8 to 10 years was 11.7% and 7.8% for strict and relaxed, respectively.

Serial posts: