Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading
The present study aims to evaluate the influence of apicocoronal position and immediate and conventional loading in the percentage of bone-implant contact (BIC). Thus, 36 implants were inserted in the edentulous mandible from six dogs. Three implants were installed in each hemimandible, in different...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2014-01-01
|
| Series: | The Scientific World Journal |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/606947 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832561748433960960 |
|---|---|
| author | Ana Emília Farias Pontes Fernando Salimon Ribeiro Giovanna Iezzi Juliana Rico Pires Elizangela Partata Zuza Adriano Piattelli Elcio Marcantonio Junior |
| author_facet | Ana Emília Farias Pontes Fernando Salimon Ribeiro Giovanna Iezzi Juliana Rico Pires Elizangela Partata Zuza Adriano Piattelli Elcio Marcantonio Junior |
| author_sort | Ana Emília Farias Pontes |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The present study aims to evaluate the influence of apicocoronal position and immediate and conventional loading in the percentage of bone-implant contact (BIC). Thus, 36 implants were inserted in the edentulous mandible from six dogs. Three implants were installed in each hemimandible, in different positions in relation to the ridge: Bone Level (at crestal bone level), Minus 1 (one millimeter apical to crestal bone), and Minus 2 (two millimeters apical to crestal bone). In addition, each hemimandible was submitted to a loading protocol: immediate (prosthesis installed 24 hours after implantation) or conventional (prosthesis installed 120 days after implantation). Ninety days after, animals were killed, and implant and adjacent tissues were prepared for histometric analysis. BIC values from immediate loaded implants were 58.7%, 57.7%, and 51.1%, respectively, while conventional loaded implants were 61.8%, 53.8%, and 68.4%. Differences statistically significant were not observed among groups (P=0.10, ANOVA test). These findings suggest that different apicocoronal positioning and loading protocols evaluated did not interfere in the percentage of bone-implant contact, suggesting that these procedures did not jeopardize osseointegration. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-0947fabdbf0c4d36bf7c5f88548cb2f0 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2356-6140 1537-744X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2014-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | The Scientific World Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-0947fabdbf0c4d36bf7c5f88548cb2f02025-02-03T01:24:12ZengWileyThe Scientific World Journal2356-61401537-744X2014-01-01201410.1155/2014/606947606947Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional LoadingAna Emília Farias Pontes0Fernando Salimon Ribeiro1Giovanna Iezzi2Juliana Rico Pires3Elizangela Partata Zuza4Adriano Piattelli5Elcio Marcantonio Junior6Master of Science Program, UNIFEB Educational Foundation of Barretos, Rua Prof. Roberto Frade Monte 389, Aeroporto, Barretos, SP, BrazilMaster of Science Program, UNIFEB Educational Foundation of Barretos, Rua Prof. Roberto Frade Monte 389, Aeroporto, Barretos, SP, BrazilDepartment of Oral Health Care Sciences, Dental School, University of Chieti-Pescara (UNICH), Chieti, AB, ItalyMaster of Science Program, UNIFEB Educational Foundation of Barretos, Rua Prof. Roberto Frade Monte 389, Aeroporto, Barretos, SP, BrazilMaster of Science Program, UNIFEB Educational Foundation of Barretos, Rua Prof. Roberto Frade Monte 389, Aeroporto, Barretos, SP, BrazilDepartment of Oral Health Care Sciences, Dental School, University of Chieti-Pescara (UNICH), Chieti, AB, ItalyDepartment of Periodontology, Araraquara Dental School, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara, SP, BrazilThe present study aims to evaluate the influence of apicocoronal position and immediate and conventional loading in the percentage of bone-implant contact (BIC). Thus, 36 implants were inserted in the edentulous mandible from six dogs. Three implants were installed in each hemimandible, in different positions in relation to the ridge: Bone Level (at crestal bone level), Minus 1 (one millimeter apical to crestal bone), and Minus 2 (two millimeters apical to crestal bone). In addition, each hemimandible was submitted to a loading protocol: immediate (prosthesis installed 24 hours after implantation) or conventional (prosthesis installed 120 days after implantation). Ninety days after, animals were killed, and implant and adjacent tissues were prepared for histometric analysis. BIC values from immediate loaded implants were 58.7%, 57.7%, and 51.1%, respectively, while conventional loaded implants were 61.8%, 53.8%, and 68.4%. Differences statistically significant were not observed among groups (P=0.10, ANOVA test). These findings suggest that different apicocoronal positioning and loading protocols evaluated did not interfere in the percentage of bone-implant contact, suggesting that these procedures did not jeopardize osseointegration.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/606947 |
| spellingShingle | Ana Emília Farias Pontes Fernando Salimon Ribeiro Giovanna Iezzi Juliana Rico Pires Elizangela Partata Zuza Adriano Piattelli Elcio Marcantonio Junior Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading The Scientific World Journal |
| title | Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading |
| title_full | Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading |
| title_fullStr | Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading |
| title_full_unstemmed | Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading |
| title_short | Bone-Implant Contact around Crestal and Subcrestal Dental Implants Submitted to Immediate and Conventional Loading |
| title_sort | bone implant contact around crestal and subcrestal dental implants submitted to immediate and conventional loading |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/606947 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT anaemiliafariaspontes boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT fernandosalimonribeiro boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT giovannaiezzi boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT julianaricopires boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT elizangelapartatazuza boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT adrianopiattelli boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading AT elciomarcantoniojunior boneimplantcontactaroundcrestalandsubcrestaldentalimplantssubmittedtoimmediateandconventionalloading |