TY - JOUR
T1 - Influence of placement depth on bone remodeling around tapered internal connection implants
T2 - A histologic study in dogs
AU - Huang, Baoxin
AU - Meng, Huanxin
AU - Zhu, Weidong
AU - Witek, Lukasz
AU - Tovar, Nick
AU - Coelho, Paulo G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
PY - 2015/8/1
Y1 - 2015/8/1
N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the influence of implant-abutment interface (IAI) placement depth on bone remodeling around implants with two different types of tapered internal IAI: screwed-in (SI) and tapped-in (TI) connections in dogs. Materials and methods: Eight weeks post mandibular tooth extraction in six beagle dogs, two SI implants (OsseoSpeed™, Astra Tech, DENTSPLY) and two TI implants (Integra-CP™, Bicon LLC) were placed in one side of the mandible. The four experimental groups were as follows: (i) SI-placed equicrestally (SIC); (ii) TI-placed equicrestally (TIC); (iii) SI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (SIS); and (iv) TI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (TIS). Healing abutments were connected 12 weeks after implant placement. Sixteen weeks later, the dogs were sacrificed and histomorphometric analysis was performed. Histometrical outcomes were evaluated using a nonparametric Brunner-Langer model. Results: Mean distance from the IAI to first bone-implant contact (IAI-fBIC) was 0.88 mm (median: 0.77; SD: 0.54) for SIC group, 1.23 mm (median: 1.22; SD: 0.66) for TIC group, 0.41 mm (median: 0.31; SD: 0.36) for SIS group, and 0.41 mm (median: 0.26; SD: 0.45) for TIS group. Subcrestal groups showed lower IAI-fBIC compared with equicrestal groups (P < 0.001). Connective tissue presented similar measurements regardless of the IAI placement depth and IAI type (P > 0.05), but the epithelium length and peri-implant soft tissue length in subcrestal groups were significant larger than that in the equicrestal groups (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Conclusion: Subcrestal implant placement with tapered internal IAI is beneficial for bone contact with the implant neck, and concurrently, it may not increase the soft tissue inflammation around IAI.
AB - Objectives: To evaluate the influence of implant-abutment interface (IAI) placement depth on bone remodeling around implants with two different types of tapered internal IAI: screwed-in (SI) and tapped-in (TI) connections in dogs. Materials and methods: Eight weeks post mandibular tooth extraction in six beagle dogs, two SI implants (OsseoSpeed™, Astra Tech, DENTSPLY) and two TI implants (Integra-CP™, Bicon LLC) were placed in one side of the mandible. The four experimental groups were as follows: (i) SI-placed equicrestally (SIC); (ii) TI-placed equicrestally (TIC); (iii) SI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (SIS); and (iv) TI-placed 1.5 mm subcrestally (TIS). Healing abutments were connected 12 weeks after implant placement. Sixteen weeks later, the dogs were sacrificed and histomorphometric analysis was performed. Histometrical outcomes were evaluated using a nonparametric Brunner-Langer model. Results: Mean distance from the IAI to first bone-implant contact (IAI-fBIC) was 0.88 mm (median: 0.77; SD: 0.54) for SIC group, 1.23 mm (median: 1.22; SD: 0.66) for TIC group, 0.41 mm (median: 0.31; SD: 0.36) for SIS group, and 0.41 mm (median: 0.26; SD: 0.45) for TIS group. Subcrestal groups showed lower IAI-fBIC compared with equicrestal groups (P < 0.001). Connective tissue presented similar measurements regardless of the IAI placement depth and IAI type (P > 0.05), but the epithelium length and peri-implant soft tissue length in subcrestal groups were significant larger than that in the equicrestal groups (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Conclusion: Subcrestal implant placement with tapered internal IAI is beneficial for bone contact with the implant neck, and concurrently, it may not increase the soft tissue inflammation around IAI.
KW - animal study
KW - biologic width
KW - crestal bone resorption
KW - implant-abutment interface
KW - subcrestal placement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84935745085&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84935745085&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/clr.12384
DO - 10.1111/clr.12384
M3 - Article
C2 - 24720447
AN - SCOPUS:84935745085
SN - 0905-7161
VL - 26
SP - 942
EP - 949
JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research
JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research
IS - 8
ER -