Effect of initial placement level and wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level in implants with a conical implant-abutment interface

A 5-year retrospective study

Jaehyun Yoo, Ik Sang Moon, Jeong Ho Yun, Chooryung Judi Chung, Jong Ki Huh, Dong Won Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P < 0.01) and within each group over time (P < 0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)185-192
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Periodontal and Implant Science
Volume49
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Retrospective Studies
Maintenance
Bone and Bones
Bone Resorption
Prostheses and Implants
Analysis of Variance

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oral Surgery
  • Periodontics

Cite this

@article{6daf498c4d5e403f9d967380fa59ac3f,
title = "Effect of initial placement level and wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level in implants with a conical implant-abutment interface: A 5-year retrospective study",
abstract = "Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P < 0.01) and within each group over time (P < 0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.",
author = "Jaehyun Yoo and Moon, {Ik Sang} and Yun, {Jeong Ho} and Chung, {Chooryung Judi} and Huh, {Jong Ki} and Lee, {Dong Won}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5051/jpis.2019.49.3.185",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "185--192",
journal = "Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science",
issn = "2093-2278",
publisher = "Korean Academy of Periodontology",
number = "3",

}

Effect of initial placement level and wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level in implants with a conical implant-abutment interface : A 5-year retrospective study. / Yoo, Jaehyun; Moon, Ik Sang; Yun, Jeong Ho; Chung, Chooryung Judi; Huh, Jong Ki; Lee, Dong Won.

In: Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science, Vol. 49, No. 3, 01.06.2019, p. 185-192.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of initial placement level and wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level in implants with a conical implant-abutment interface

T2 - A 5-year retrospective study

AU - Yoo, Jaehyun

AU - Moon, Ik Sang

AU - Yun, Jeong Ho

AU - Chung, Chooryung Judi

AU - Huh, Jong Ki

AU - Lee, Dong Won

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P < 0.01) and within each group over time (P < 0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.

AB - Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P < 0.01) and within each group over time (P < 0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068543026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068543026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5051/jpis.2019.49.3.185

DO - 10.5051/jpis.2019.49.3.185

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 185

EP - 192

JO - Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

JF - Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

SN - 2093-2278

IS - 3

ER -