Fig. 8. Mean values of crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test
Fig. 8. Mean values of crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test
Fig. 7. Changes of CBL (mm) between the two groups in sites with KKT > 2 and ≤ 2 mm. ANOVA test
Fig. 7. Changes of CBL (mm) between the two groups in sites with KKT > 2 and ≤ 2 mm. ANOVA test
Fig. 6. Mean values of gingival recession (REC) between the two groups at the end of follow-up period (3-year). ANOVA test
Fig. 6. Mean values of gingival recession (REC) between the two groups at the end of follow-up period (3-year). ANOVA test
Fig. 5. Mean values of probing depth (PD) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test P > 0.05
Fig. 5. Mean values of probing depth (PD) between the two groups during the follow-up period. ANOVA test P > 0.05
Fig. 4. Schematic view of radiographic measurement references
Fig. 4. Schematic view of radiographic measurement references
Fig. 3. Implants used in the present study and laser-microtextured intramucosal surface (original magnification × 800)
Fig. 3. Implants used in the present study and laser-microtextured intramucosal surface (original magnification × 800)
Fig. 2. Example of the location of a submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
Fig. 2. Example of the location of a submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
Fig. 1. Example of the location of a non-submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
Fig. 1. Example of the location of a non-submerged implant, bone, and adjacent tooth
FMPPD (mm)FMPS (%)FMBS (%)Mean (SD)Mean (SD)Mean (SD)Baseline1.6 (0.3)13.7 (2.1)11.4 (1.7)3-year follow-up (T3)1.8 (0.2)15.1 (1.4)12.3 (1.4)Significance0.770.810.39Table 4 Patients’ full-mouth periodontal probing depth (FMPPD), full-mouth plaque score (FMPS), and full-mouth bleeding score (FMBS) recorded during the follow-up period
T01-year2-year3-yearNumber of sites with plaque Submerged77912 Nonsubmerged1210811 Significance0.230.310.220.82Number of sites with BOP Submerged210914 Nonsubmerged610411 Significance0.080.750.510.41Table 3 Differences in number of sites with plaque and bleeding on probing (BOP) between the two groups during the follow-up period (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, P > 0.05)
PositionTotal implantsSubmergedNon-submerged142111552316312171-1244222543126321270--341-1351-13653237211442-2451-1464314722-Table 2 Distribution of each implant in each group
No. of patients/age (years)/sexPositionSubmergedNonsubmergedLength/diameter (mm)1/44y/M14X 10.5 × 3.826 X9 × 3.82/51y/M36X 9 × 4.644 X9 × 3.83/59y/F35 X10.5 × 3.846X 10.5 × 4.64/38y/F47X 9 × 4.636 X9 × 4.65/57y/M24 X12 × 3.815X 12 × 3.86/44y/F16 X9 × 4.624X 12 × 3.87/60y/M36X 10.5 × 4.646 X10.5 × 4.68/49y/F15 X12 × 3.824X 10.5 × 3.89/46y/M37X 9 × 4.645 X9 × 3.81...
Guarnieri, R., Di Nardo, D., Di Giorgio, G. et al. Clinical and radiographics results at 3 years of RCT with split-mouth design of submerged vs. nonsubmerged single laser-microgrooved implants in posterior areas. Int J Implant Dent 5, 44 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0196-0
Download citation
Received: 15 July 2019
Accepted: 15 November 2019
Published: 18 December 2019
DOI: https:...
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were m...
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The study was approved by the Institutional Ethic committee of La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy, (#4597). All patients were informed that two different implants were used and gave their informed consent to the treatment
Not applicable.
Renzo Guarnieri, Dario Di Nardo, Gianni Di Giorgio, Gabriele Miccoli, and Luca Testarelli state that they have no competing interests.
Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
Renzo Guarnieri, Dario Di Nardo, Gianni Di Giorgio, Gabriele Miccoli & Luca Testarelli
Treviso, Italy
Renzo Guarnieri
You can also search for this author in
PubMed Google Scholar
You can also search for this author in
PubMed Google ...
The study was supported by BioHorizons, Birmingham, AL, USA, who provided the materials.
Authors report no conflict of interests. BioHorizons, Birmingham, AL, USA, provided the materials of the study.
Derks J, Håkansson J, Wennström JL, Tomasi C, Larsson M, Berglundh T. Effectiveness of implant therapy analyzed in a Swedish population: early and late implant loss. J Dent Res. 2015;94(3 Suppl):44S–51S.
Download references
Al Amri MD. Crestal bone loss around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(5):564–570.e1.
Sanz M, Ivanoff CJ, Weingart D, Wiltfang J, Gahlert M, Cordaro L, Ganeles J, Bragger U, Jackowski J, Martin WC, Jung RE, Chen S, Hammerle C. Clinical and radiologic outcomes after submerged and transmucosal implant placement with two-piece implants in th...
Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Chew YS, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. One-stage versus two-stage implant placement. A Cochrane systematic review of randomised controlled clinical trials. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2009; Summer;2(2):91–9.
Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol. 1996;23:971–3.
Flores-Guillen J, Álvarez-Novoa C, Barbieri ...
Esposito M, Coulthard P, Thomsen P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;1:CD003815.
Brånemark PI, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intraosseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;3(2):81–100.
Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell ...
The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
After 3 years of loading, no differences were founded in CBL and soft tissue conditions between single submerged two-stage and non-submerged one-stage laser-microgrooved implants.
Few studies evaluated the influence of vertical KTT on CBL at the time of implant placement [28,29,30]. Linkevicius et al. [30] investigated the influence of vertical KTT on CBL around implants placed 2 mm supracrestally (non-submerged/test) and implants placed at bone level (submerged connected with healing abutments/control), after 1 year of loading. In sites with vertical KTT ≤ 2 mm, al...
Data from available literature indicate that if submerged/nonsubmerged techniques do affect CBL, this effect could be associated with the post-operative healing period [9, 23, 24]. In the present study, at the end of the follow-up period (3 years), no significant difference was detected in CBL around submerged and nonsubmerged implants. A possible explanation for this observation could be that s...
CBL mean values recorded around submerged and nonsubmerged implants at different timepoints are the most interesting results of the present randomized clinical trial. Before functional loading, radiographic CBL was significantly greater in submerged implants than that in nonsubmerged implants (0.23 mm ± 0.05 mm vs. 0.09 mm ± 0.07 mm). During the follow-up period, both implants showed sim...
At the end of the follow-up period, no patient dropped off the study, and the survival rate was 100% for both groups of implants.
At the 3-year follow-up, no statistically significant difference was found between the study groups regarding PI and BOP (P > 0.05). The number of sites with plaque was 12 (15%) for submerged implants and 11 (13.7%) for the nonsubmerged implants, whereas the mean numbe...
A public domain online software (Raosoft, http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html) was used to calculate the minimum number necessary for statistical evaluation. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 13.0 (Chicago, IL, USA). For clinical parameters (PD and REC) and radiographic CBL, data were calculated for each implant and reported as the mean ± SD, at baseline (T0), at 1-year (T1), 2-ye...
The following radiographic measurements were performed:
radiographic implant length (IL): distance (in mm) between the implant coronal margin and the implant apex as assessed at the mid portion of the implant
residual bone height at the mesial (MI) and distal (DI) aspects of the implant: distance (in mm) between the line linking the coronal implant margin and the first contact of the crestal b...
In the submerged group, second-stage surgeries for the placement of healing abutments were carried out after 4 months in the mandible and 6 months in the maxilla. This procedure was performed by a midcrestal minimal incision, slightly larger than the coronal diameter of the implant. No secondary surgical manipulation of the soft tissue was performed. Once the healing screw was inserted, suturi...
The cases were randomly divided into two groups as two-stage/submerged and one-stage/nonsubmerged. Thus, in each patient, the two implants (submerged and nonsubmerged) were placed randomly in the left and right posterior area of the mandible, or in the left and right posterior area of the maxilla (Tables 1 and 2).
For a complete pre-surgical evaluation, an intra-oral rx and a CBCT scan examinat...
This randomized clinical trial included 20 patients, 12 males and 8 females, between the age of 36 and 64 (mean age of 49.7 ± 12.3 years), who were partially edentulous and needed implants for rehabilitation with a single tooth/implant of two non-adjacent sites. Patients were consecutively enrolled between January and July 2014. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics committee of La...
In the last decades, the replacement of missing teeth with implant-supported restorations has become a predictable treatment with excellent long-term results [1]. It is based on the concept of intimate interfacial contact between the bone and functionally loaded dental implants, defined as “osseointegration” by Brånemark et al. [2, 3] and “functional ankylosis or direct bone apposition to t...
To evaluate and compare radiographic crestal bone loss (CBL) and soft tissue parameters around submerged/two-stage and nonsubmerged/one-stage single implants with the same endosseous portion (body design and surface, thread design and distance) and identical intramucosal laser-microgrooved surface, after 3 years of loading.
Twenty submerged/two-stage implants and 20 nonsubmerged/one-stage impla...