Effect of implant diameter and cantilever length on the marginal bone height changes and stability of implants supporting screw retained prostheses: A randomized double blinded control trial
10.4047/jap.2023.15.3.101
- Author:
Heba Ezzeldin KHORSHID
1
;
Noha Ossama ISSA
;
Amr Mohamed EKRAM
Author Information
1. Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
2023;15(3):101-113
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE:. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effect of implants’ two different diameters and cantilever lengths on the marginal bone loss and stability of mplants supporting maxillary prostheses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:. Ninety-six implants were placed in sixteen completely edentulous maxillary ridges. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, implants were placed with a cantilever to anterior-posterior AP spread length (CL:AP) at a ratio of 1:3; Group B, implants were placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:2. Patients were further divided into four sub-groups: Groups A1, A2, B1, and B2. Groups A1 and B1 received small diameter implants while Groups A2 and B2 received standard diameter implants. Bone height and stability measurements around each implant were performed at 0, 4, 8 and 24 months after definitive prostheses delivery.
RESULTS:. Statistical analysis of the mean implant stability and height values revealed an insignificant difference between Group A1 and Group A2 at all the different time intervals while significantly higher values in Group B1 in comparison with Group B2. Results also showed significantly higher values in Group A1 in comparison with Group B1 and an insignificant difference between Group A2 and Group B2 at all the different time intervals.
CONCLUSION:. It can be concluded that the use of small diameter implants placed with a CL:AP at a ratio of 1:3 provided predictable results and that the 1:2 CL:AP significantly induced more critical bone loss in the small diameter implants group, which can significantly reduce long term success and survival of implants [J Adv Prosthodont 2023;15:101-13]
