Clinical evaluation of submerged and non-submerged implants for posterior single-tooth replacements: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial

Nemli S. K., Gungor M., Aydin C., Yilmaz H., Turkcan I., Demirkoprulu H.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, cilt.43, sa.12, ss.1484-1492, 2014 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 43 Sayı: 12
  • Basım Tarihi: 2014
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.08.003
  • Dergi Adı: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1484-1492
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: dental implant, single tooth replacement, submerged implant, non-submerged implant, clinical evaluation, OSSEOINTEGRATED DENTAL IMPLANTS, LIFE-TABLE ANALYSIS, PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER, RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION, ORAL IMPLANTS, FOLLOW-UP, PROSTHESES, SURVIVAL, SUCCESS, TRANSMUCOSAL
  • Gazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical and radiographic results of submerged and non-submerged implants for posterior single-tooth replacements and to assess patient-based outcomes. Twenty patients were included in the study. A split-mouth design was used; implants inserted using a submerged technique were compared to those inserted with a non-submerged technique. Implants were restored with metal ceramic crowns after 3 months. Reconstructions were examined at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months. Standardized radiographs were made. Radiographic crestal bone level changes were calculated, as well as soft tissue parameters, including pocket probing depth, bleeding on probing, plaque index, and gingival index. Results were analyzed by two-way repeated measures of variance (ANOVA). To evaluate patient-based outcomes, patients were asked to complete a questionnaire at the 6-month follow-up; the Wilcoxon paired signed rank test was used to compare scores. The data of 18 patients were reviewed. During 24 months, non-submerged implants (0.57 +/- 0.21 mm) showed significantly lower bone loss than submerged implants (0.68 +/- 0.22 mm) (P < 0.01). Patient satisfaction with non-submerged implants (median 87.5) was significantly higher than with submerged implants (median 81.5) (P < 0.01). Non-submerged implants showed comparable clinical results to submerged implants and resulted in higher patient satisfaction due to decreased surgical intervention.