Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 23(4): 438-46, 2012 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21435011

RESUMO

PURPOSE: A stable oral mucosa is crucial for long-term survival and biofunctionality of implants. Most of this evidence is derived from clinical and animal studies based solely on implant-supported prosthesis. Much less is known about the dimensions and relationships of this soft tissue complex investing tooth-implant-supported bridgework (TISB). The aim here was to obtain experimental evidence on the dimensional characteristics of oral mucosa around TISB with two different abutment designs. METHODS: Sixteen 3-unit TISB were constructed bilaterally in the mandible of eight adult Macaca fascicularis. An implant system with a standard progressive thread design was the bone-anchoring implant in the second mandibular molar region while the second mandibular premolar served as the natural tooth abutment. Eight implants were connected with the tapered abutment, the remaining with butt-joint abutment, in a split-mouth design. These were allowed to functional load for 6 months before sacrification for histomorphometry. Six soft tissue indices were scored: coronal gingival mucosa-to-implant top distance (DIM); sulcus depth (SD); junctional epithelium (JE); connective tissue contact (CTC); implant top to first bone-to-implant contact distance (DIB); and biologic width (BW=SD+JE+CTC); corresponding parameters in the natural tooth abutment were also measured. RESULTS: Mucosal dimensions in tapered implants (*BW=3.33±0.43; SD=1.03±0.24; JE=1.08±0.13; CTC=1.22±0.23 mm) were comparable with those of natural tooth abutments (BW=3.04±0.18; SD=0.93±0.1; JE=0.78±0.1; Attachment=1.33±0.09 mm), but differed from butt-joint implants (*BW=4.88±1.24; SD=1.47±0.38; JE=1.49±0.4; CTC=1.92±0.93 mm) (*P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggested that soft tissue dimensions around TISB are influenced by the implant-abutment interface and abutment material used. Mucosa investing tapered abutment tends to recapitulate soft tissue physiologic dimensions of natural tooth.


Assuntos
Implantação Dentária Endóssea/métodos , Prótese Dentária Fixada por Implante , Mandíbula/cirurgia , Mucosa Bucal/anatomia & histologia , Animais , Dente Suporte , Implantes Dentários , Planejamento de Prótese Dentária , Prótese Parcial , Carga Imediata em Implante Dentário , Implantes Experimentais , Macaca fascicularis , Software , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Cicatrização
2.
Implant Dent ; 18(5): 438-46, 2009 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22129962

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical soft tissue responses around implant tooth-supported 3-unit bridges using tapered abutments with those using butt-joint abutments. METHODS: In a split-mouth design study, 8 mm Ankylos (Dentsply Friadent, Germany) implants were placed in the second mandibular molar region of 8 adult Macaca fascicularis monkeys about 1 month after extraction of all mandibular molars. After 3 months of submerged healing, 3-unit metal bridges were constructed. Clinical data was collected by the author who was blind to the abutment selections. Implants were clinically evaluated using Waite plaque index, sulcus bleeding index, probing pocket depth (PPD), probing attachment loss (PAL), and width of keratinized mucosa at baseline (BL) and 3-month and 6-month intervals. Stability of the implant was assessed using Periotest device at BL and after 6 months. RESULTS: At BL, all the clinical variables did not differ statistically between the tapered and the butt-joint groups except for PPD (P < 0.05), where the mean PPD was greater in the butt-joint group (2.75 ± 1.02 mm) as compared with the tapered group (1.97 ± 0.65 mm). At the 3-month assessment, there was no difference in all clinical variables. After 6-month loading, no significant difference between these 2 groups was detected in all these variables, with the exception of PAL (P = 0.05) where mean PAL was greater for implants with the butt-joint abutments (0.91 ± 0.86 mm) in comparison with the tapered abutments (0.50 ± 0.88 mm), and mean Periotest values (PTVs) that indicate the tapered-abutment implants (PTV = -4.5 ± 1.60) were more stable than butt-joint-abutment implants (PTV = -1.5 ± 3.59) with P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in these mucogingival responses between these 2 groups at BL (during seating of abutments, especially of butt-joint abutments) and after 6-month loading indicated enhanced peri-implant soft tissue stability around the tapered abutments of this system. There was also enhanced-PTV in the test group for clinical mobility assessment after 6-month loading.


Assuntos
Projeto do Implante Dentário-Pivô , Prótese Dentária Fixada por Implante , Prótese Parcial Fixa , Peri-Implantite/patologia , Bolsa Periodontal/patologia , Animais , Projeto do Implante Dentário-Pivô/efeitos adversos , Índice de Placa Dentária , Macaca fascicularis , Mandíbula/cirurgia , Peri-Implantite/etiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...