RESEARCH ARTICLE


A One-year Follow-up Study of a Tapered Hydrophilic Implant Design Using Various Placement Protocols in the Maxilla



Jakob Zwaan1, Leonardo Vanden Bogaerde2, Herman Sahlin3, Lars Sennerby4, *
1 Private Practice, Via S. Rocco 377, 24033 Calusco d’Adda, Italy
2 Private Practice, Via Dante Alighieri 32, 20049 Concorezzo, Italy
3 Clinical Trials, Neoss Ltd, Mölnlycke Fabriker 3, 43535 Mölnlycke, Sweden
4 Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Medicinaregatan 12C, Box 450, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1825
Abstract HTML Views: 1228
PDF Downloads: 310
ePub Downloads: 209
Total Views/Downloads: 3572
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 847
Abstract HTML Views: 670
PDF Downloads: 210
ePub Downloads: 159
Total Views/Downloads: 1886



© Zwaan et al.; Licensee Bentham Open

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

* Address correspondence to this author at the Lars Sennerby, Department Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, PO Box 450, SE 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden; Tel: +46 31 826 091, + 46 708 127156; E-mail: lars.sennerby@gu.se


Abstract

Purpose:

To study the clinical/radiographic outcomes and stability of a tapered implant design with a hydrophilic surface when placed in the maxilla using various protocols and followed for one year.

Methods:

Ninety-seven consecutive patients treated as part of daily routine in two clinics with 163 tapered implants in healed sites, in extraction sockets and together with bone augmentation procedures in the maxilla were evaluated after one year in function. Individual healing periods varying from 0 to 6 months had been used. Insertion torque (IT) and resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements were made at baseline. Follow-up RFA registrations were made after 6 and 12 months of loading. The marginal bone levels were measured in intraoral radiographs from baseline and after 12 months. A reference group consisting of 163 consecutive straight maxillary implants was used for the comparison of baseline IT and RFA measurements.

Results:

Five implants failed before loading, giving an implant survival rate of 96.9% and a prosthesis survival rate of 99.4% after one year. The mean marginal bone loss after one year was 0.5 mm (SD 0.4). The mean IT was statistically significantly higher for tapered than for straight reference implants (41.3 ± 12.0 Ncm vs 33.6 ± 12.5 Ncm, p < 0.001). The tapered implants showed a statistically insignificantly higher mean ISQ value than the straight references implants (73.7 ± 6.4 ISQ vs 72.2 ± 8.0 ISQ, p=0.119). There was no correlation between IT and marginal bone loss. There was a correlation between IT and RFA measurements (p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

The tapered implant showed a high survival rate and minimal marginal bone loss after one year in function when using various protocols for placement. The tapered implant showed significantly higher insertion torque values than straight reference implants.

Keywords: Clinical follow-up study, Marginal bone loss, Radiography, Resonance frequency analysis, Tapered implant.