Resonance Frequency Analysis of Dental Implants With 2 Types of Surface Treatment Submitted to Immediate Loading: A Prospective Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND: Characteristics of the implant surface may benefit osseointegration, and the knowledge of this process in diverse clinical situations may play a role in implant dentistry practice. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to compare the stability of dental implants with different types of surface treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-five implants were placed in the mandibles of 11 fully edentulous patients. Group 1 (G1) consisted of 27 implants with a hydrophilic surface. Group 2 (G2) consisted of 28 implants (double sandblasting and acid etching). Implants were distributed randomly; equal surfaces were not placed contiguously. Measurements were taken after surgery (baseline) and 10, 30, 60, and 90 days, 4 and 8 months after surgery. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was used for determining the stability. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found. The largest difference in implant stability quotient (ISQ) between groups occurred at the first evaluation (ISQ ≈ 69.8 in G1 and ≈ 68.4 in G2). Reductions in stability were more accentuated in the first month, returning to values similar to baseline in the subsequent months, with peak stability reached at 8 months (ISQ ≈ 69.8 in G1 and ≈ 69.8 in G2). CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences were found in the stability of the implants placed in edentulous mandibular arch, submitted to immediate loading analyzed using RFA.

Bone behavior in atrophic edentulous mandibles after rehabilitation with immediate loaded implant: a short-term radiographic and tomographic study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate bone response in the posterior area of edentulous mandibles rehabilitated with fixed prosthesis supported on dental implants considering baseline severity of mandibular atrophy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample included 15 patients in whom 5 implants were inserted between the mental foramens. The prosthesis followed a cantilever extension from 15 to 20 mm. They were divided into 2 groups (severe and moderate) according to the degree of the atrophy presented. Panoramic x-ray and computerized tomography were obtained immediately after rehabilitation (T0) and after 8 months (T8). Linear measurements of the alveolar bone height at the posterior area of the mandible, 5, 10, and 15 mm from the long axis of the most distal implants, were recorded. Density measurements were also achieved at the same sites. RESULTS: A slight bone increase in both groups was observed but with no statistically significant difference according to the baseline degree of atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: There was slight qualitative and quantitative bone improvement in the posterior area of the mandibles with the use of immediately loaded implant-supported fixed prostheses during the observed period. These results suggest that long-term follow-up is very important to understand bone behavior after rehabilitation.

Implant stability measurements of two immediate loading protocols for the edentulous mandible: rigid and semi-rigid splinting of the implants.

AIM: Primary and secondary stabilities of immediately loaded mandibular implants restored with fixed prostheses (FP) using rigid or semi-rigid splinting systems were clinically and radiographically evaluated. METHODS: Fifteen edentulous patients were rehabilitated using hybrid FP; each had 5 implants placed between the mental foramens. Two groups were randomly divided: group 1-FP with the conventional rigid bar splinting the implants and group 2-semi-rigid cantilever extension system with titanium bars placed in the 2 distal abutment cylinders. Primary stability was evaluated using resonance frequency analysis after installation of the implant abutments. The measurements were made at 3 times: T0, at baseline; T1, 4 months after implant placement; and T2, 8 months after implant placement. Presence of mobility and inflammation in the implant surrounding regions were checked. Stability data were submitted to statistical analysis for comparison between groups (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Implant survival rate for the implants was of 100% in both groups. No significant differences in the mean implant stability quotient values were found for both groups from baseline and after the 8-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The immediate loading of the implants was satisfactory, and both splinting conditions (rigid and semi-rigid) can be successfully used for the restoration of edentulous mandibles.