Gingival changes in patients with single molar loss undergoing fixed implant restoration: a 1-year follow-up

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.38.012

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Submerged dental implants that are completely embedded into soft tissues and isolated from the oral environment reduce the potential for infection factors, and are not influenced by the bite force, to ensure the implant osseointegration.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of submerged and non-submerged dental implants on the recovery of oral soft tissues.
METHODS: Twenty-four patients who had no contraindication of dental implants and missed one molar with the gingival thickness of more than 1.5 mm were enrolled and divided into two groups. Patients were implanted with non-submerged SS implants of OSSTEM in one group (non-submerged group) and implanted with submerged TS implants of OSSTEM in the other group (submerged group). Variation of gingival thickness, Jemt index and alveolar bone resorption were detected after 2 weeks of one- and two-stage surgery and 1 year after surgery.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There were no statistical differences in gingival thickness, Jemt index and alveolar bone resorption between two groups. As these two surgical methods have no difference, we would like to use submerged or non-submerged implants in the patients with corresponding indications.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

Key words: Tooth, Dental Implants, Gingiva, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Zhang Ning, Wang Xiao-lan, Li Xiao-lu, Wang Xiao-xin, Li Hong-mei, Li Yun-sheng.

Gingival changes in patients with single molar loss undergoing fixed implant restoration: a 1-year follow-up

[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2016, 20(38): 5703-5708.

Figures/Tables 1

References

[1]Al-Marshood MM, Junker R, Al-Rasheed A, et al.Study of the osseointegration of dental implants placed with an adapted surgical technique.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(7):753-759.
[2]Talarico M,Vacarela A,Marzi GC. Clinical and radiological outcomes of 1- versus 2-stage implant placement: 1-year results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur J OralImplantol. 2011;4(1):13-20.
[3]Schroeder A,Pohler O,Sutter F.Tissue reaction to an implant of a titanium hollow cylinder with a titanium surface spray layer.SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd.1976;86(7):713-727.
[4]Buser D,Mericske-Stem R,Bernard JP,et al.Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants.Part 1:8-year life table analysis of a prospective muhicenter study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res.1997; 8(1):161-172.
[5]Albrektsson T, Zard G, Worthington P, et al. The long-term efficacy of currently us ed dental implants:a review and proposed criteria of success.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.1986;1(1):11-25.
[6]Jemt T.Regeneration of gingival papillae after single- implanttreatment.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1997;17(4):326-333.
[7]David L,Cochran M. Biologic width: a physiologically and politically resilient structure. Int J Periodont Rest. 2012;32(4):371-373. ?
[8]Sanavi F,Weisgold AS,Rose LF. Biologic widt h and itsrelation to periodontal biotypes. J Esthet Dent. 1998; 10(3):157-167.
[9]Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the peri-implant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J ClinPeriodontol. 1996;23(10):971-973.
[10]Thupbach P, Glauser R.The defense architecture of the humanperi-implant mucosa: A histological study. J Prosthet Dent.2007;97(6 Suppl):S15-S25.
[11]Abrahamsson I,Zitzmann NU,Berglundh T,et al.The mucosal attachment to titanium implants with different surface characteristics:Anexperimentalstudyindogs. JClinPeriodontol.2002; 29(5):448-455.
[12]Chow YC, Eber RM, Tsao YP, et al. Factors associated with the appearance of gingival papilla. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37(8):719-727.
[13]Fu JH, Yeh CY, Chan HL, et al. Tissue biotype and its relation to the underlying bone morphology. J Periodontol.2010;81(4):569-574.
[14]Lazzara IU,Porter SS.Platform switching:a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling post restorative crestal bone levels.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent.2006;26(1):9-17.
[15]Gardner DM.Platform switching as a means to achieving implant esthetics.N Y State Dent J. 2005; 71:34-37.
[16]Choquet V, Hermans M, Adriaenssens P, et al.Clinical and radiographic evaluation of the papilla level adjacent to single- tooth dental implants.A retrospective study in the maxillary anterior region. J Periodontol.2001;72(10):1364-1371.
[17]Cochran DL,Hemann Js,SchenkR K,et al.Biologic width around titanium implants.A history analysis of the implantgingival junction around unloaded and loaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible.J Periondontol.1997;68(2):186-198.
[18]Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S,et al.The influence of soft tissue thickness on crest bone changes around implants:a l-yearprospective controlled clinical trial.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(4):712-719.
[19]Lillkevicius T,Aspe P,Grybauskas S,el al.Influence of thin mucosal tissues on crestal bone stability around implants with platform switching: a 1-year pilot study.J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2010;68(9):2272-2277.
[20]Atieh MA,Ibrahim HM,Atieh AH.Platform switching for marginal bone preservation around dental implants:a systematic review and meta-analvsis.J PeriodonIol. 2010;81(10):1350-1366.