Biologic Width around one- and two-piece titanium implants.

Gingival esthetics around natural teeth is based upon a constant vertical dimension of healthy periodontal soft tissues, the Biologic Width. When placing endosseous implants, however, several factors influence periimplant soft and crestal hard tissue reactions, which are not well understood as of today. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to histometrically examine periimplant soft tissue dimensions dependent on varying locations of a rough/smooth implant border in one-piece implants or a microgap (interface) in two-piece implants in relation to the crest of the bone, with two-piece implants being placed according to either a submerged or a nonsubmerged technique. Thus, 59 implants were placed in edentulous mandibular areas of five foxhounds in a side-by-side comparison. At the time of sacrifice, six months after implant placement, the Biologic Width dimension for one-piece implants, with the rough/smooth border located at the bone crest level, was significantly smaller (P<0.05) compared to two-piece implants with a microgap (interface) located at or below the crest of the bone. In addition, for one-piece implants, the tip of the gingival margin (GM) was located significantly more coronally (P<0.005) compared to two-piece implants. These findings, as evaluated by nondecalcified histology under unloaded conditions in the canine mandible, suggest that the gingival margin (GM) is located more coronally and Biologic Width (BW) dimensions are more similar to natural teeth around one-piece nonsubmerged implants compared to either two-piece nonsubmerged or two-piece submerged implants.

Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible.

BACKGROUND: Endosseous implants can be placed according to a non-submerged or submerged approach and in 1- or 2-piece configurations. Recently, it was shown that peri-implant crestal bone changes differ significantly under such conditions and are dependent on a rough/smooth implant border in 1-piece implants and on the location of an interface (microgap) between the implant and abutment/restoration in 2-piece configurations. Several factors may influence the resultant level of the crestal bone under these conditions, including movements between implant components and the size of the microgap (interface) between the implant and abutment. However, no data are available on the impact of possible movements between these components or the impact of the size of the microgap (interface). The purpose of this study was to histometrically evaluate crestal bone changes around unloaded, 2-piece non-submerged titanium implants with 3 different microgap (interface) dimensions and between implants with components welded together or held together by a transocclusal screw. METHODS: A total of 60 titanium implants were randomly placed in edentulous mandibular areas of 5 hounds forming 6 different implant subgroups (A through F). In general, all implants had a relatively smooth, machined suprabony portion 1 mm long, as well as a rough, sandblasted, and acid-etched (SLA) endosseous portion, all placed with their interface (microgap) 1 mm above the bone crest level and having abutments connected at the time of first-stage surgery. Implant types A, B, and C had a microgap of < 10 microns, approximately 50 microns, or approximately 100 microns between implant components as did types D, E, and F, respectively. As a major difference, however, abutments and implants of types A, B, and C were laser-welded together, not allowing for any movements between components, as opposed to types D, E, and F, where abutments and implants were held together by abutment screws. Three months after implant placement, all animals were sacrificed. Non-decalcified histology was analyzed histometrically by evaluating peri-implant crestal bone changes. RESULTS: For implants in the laser-welded group (A, B, and C), mean crestal bone levels were located at a distance from the interface (IF; microgap) to the first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC) of 1.06 +/- 0.46 mm (standard deviation) for type A, 1.28 +/- 0.47 mm for type B, and 1.17 +/- 0.51 mm for type C. All implants of the non-welded group (D, E, and F) had significantly increased amounts of crestal bone loss, with 1.72 +/- 0.49 mm for type D (P < 0.01 compared to type A), 1.71 +/- 0.43 mm for type E (P < 0.02 compared to type B), and 1.65 +/- 0.37 mm for type F (P < 0.01 compared to type C). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate, as evaluated by non-decalcified histology under unloaded conditions in the canine mandible, that crestal bone changes around 2-piece, non-submerged titanium implants are significantly influenced by possible movements between implants and abutments, but not by the size of the microgap (interface). Thus, significant crestal bone loss occurs in 2-piece implant configurations even with the smallest-sized microgaps (< 10 microns) in combination with possible movements between implant components.

Crestal bone changes around titanium implants: a methodologic study comparing linear radiographic with histometric measurements.

Generally, endosseous implants can be placed according to a nonsubmerged or a submerged technique and in 1-piece or 2-piece configurations. Recently, it has been shown that peri-implant crestal bone reactions differ significantly radiographically as well as histometrically under such conditions and are dependent on a rough/smooth implant border in 1-piece implants and on the location of a microgap (interface) between the implant and the abutment/restoration in 2-piece configurations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether standardized radiography as a noninvasive clinical diagnostic method correlates with peri-implant crestal bone levels as determined by histometric analysis. Fifty-nine implants were placed in edentulous mandibular areas of 5 foxhounds in a side-by-side comparison in both submerged and nonsubmerged techniques. Three months after implant placement, abutment connection was performed in the submerged implant sites. At 6 months, all animals were sacrificed, and evaluations of the first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC), determined on standardized periapical radiographs, were compared to similar analyses made from nondecalcified histology. It was shown that both techniques provide the same information (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.993; P < .001). The precision of the radiographs was within 0.1 mm of the histometry in 73.4% of the evaluations, while the level of agreement fell to between 0.1 and 0.2 mm in 15.9% of the cases. These data demonstrate in an experimental study that standardized periapical radiography can evaluate crestal bone levels around implants clinically accurately (within 0.2 mm) in a high percentage (89%) of cases. These findings are significant because crestal bone levels can be determined using a noninvasive technique, and block sectioning or sacrifice of the animal subject is not required. In addition, longitudinal evaluations can be made accurately such that bone changes over various time periods can be assessed. Such analyses may prove beneficial when trying to distinguish physiologic changes from pathologic changes or when trying to determine causes and effects of bone changes around dental implants.

Impact of legal liability, family wishes, and other "external factors" on physicians' life-support decisions.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of external factors on physicians' life-support decisions. "External factors" are those factors that promote the interests of people other than the patient. Examples of external factors include physician legal liability and family wishes about patient care. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A nationwide sample consisted of 300 randomly selected physician-members from the American Society of Law and Medicine (ASLM) and 300 from the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM); 179 ASLM physicians (60%) and 165 SCCM physicians (55%) responded. A mailed questionnaire presented three cases, each requiring the physician to make a life-support decision. For each case, the physician chose one of several life-support options and rated the importance to his or her decision of specific "decision factors," including some external factors. We assumed the physician would choose the management option supported by the decision factors that the physician considered most important. For this reason, we used discriminant analysis to identify the factors whose importance ratings best predicted management choices. RESULTS: In the first case, 46% of ASLM respondents and 55% of SCCM respondents chose to stop the ventilator of a chronically comatose patient with unknown preferences about life support. Thirty-one percent of ASLM and 27% of SCCM respondents chose to continue the ventilator, and 21% of ASLM and 14% of SCCM respondents chose to apply for a judicial decision. Importance ratings for the external factor, physician legal liability, best predicted management choices. In the second case, 95% of ASLM and 94% of SCCM respondents chose to resuscitate a cancer patient at the patient's request; 3% of ASLM and 4% of SCCM respondents chose no resuscitation. Importance ratings for patient preferences best predicted management choices. In the third case, 38% of ASLM and 35% of SCCM respondents honored a stroke patient's previous refusal of tube feedings, but 59% of ASLM and 62% of SCCM respondents authorized tube feedings in order to secure nursing home placement. Importance ratings for patient preferences best predicted management choices in this case. External factors impacted management choices considerably in the first case and more modestly in the second and third cases. CONCLUSION: External factors impact the life-support decisions of physicians. Physician legal liability may have an especially great impact on these decisions when patients' preferences are not known.

Correction of density changes caused by methodological errors in CADIA.

Quantitative evaluation of radiographic changes by computer-assisted densitometric image analysis (CADIA) requires exact knowledge about method errors. In the present study, density change errors were determined from pairs of films with "no change". From this distribution of error values, a series of threshold values for correction of changes due to method errors was selected. The threshold values were then applied to results from analysis of densitometric changes in sites with "known loss" or "no change" of the alveolar bone among films from cynomolgus monkeys. The density errors formed non-normal distributions with no difference in magnitudes between the absolute values expressing density decreases and density increases in the same areas. Calculation of sensitivity, specificity, type 1 and type 2 errors showed that these variables were clearly influenced by selection of different threshold values for correction of the density change errors. It is therefore recommended that threshold values be determined for each analytical system initially as well as following any equipment or computer program modification. Before selecting the threshold value for a specific radiographic analysis, the desired level of sensitivity and specificity should be evaluated.