Peri-implant crevicular fluid levels of cathepsin-K, RANKL, and OPG around standard, short, and mini dental implants after prosthodontic loading.
10.5051/jpis.2015.45.5.169
- Author:
Raif ALAN
1
;
Ismail MARAKOGLU
;
Seyfullah HALILOGLU
Author Information
1. Department of Periodontology, Necmettin Erbakan University Faculty of Dentistry, Konya, Turkey. drraifalan17@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Alveolar bone loss;
Cathepsin K;
Dental implants;
Osteoprotegerin;
RANK ligand
- MeSH:
Alveolar Bone Loss;
Cathepsin K;
Cathepsins;
Dental Implants*;
Dentistry;
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay;
Female;
Hemorrhage;
Humans;
Jaw;
Male;
Osteoprotegerin;
Periodontal Index;
Prosthodontics*;
RANK Ligand
- From:Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science
2015;45(5):169-177
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Despite the high success rates of endosseous dental implants, their placement is restricted according to the height and volume of bone available. The use of short or mini dental implants could be one way to overcome this limitation. Thus, this study aimed to compare standard, short, and mini dental implants with regard to associated clinical parameters and peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) levels of cathepsin -K (CTSK), RANK ligand (RANKL), and osteoprotegerin (OPG), after prosthodontic loading. METHODS: A total of 78 non-submerged implants (Euroteknika, Aesthetica+2, Sallanches, France) were installed in 30 subjects (13 male, 17 female; range, 26-62 years) who visited the clinic of the Periodontology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Selcuk University. Sampling and measurements were performed on the loading date (baseline) and 2, 14, and 90 days after loading. Assessment of the peri-implant status for the implant sites was performed using the pocket probing depth (PPD), modified plaque index, modified gingival index, modified sulcular bleeding index, and radiographic signs of bone loss. PICF samples collected from each implant were evaluated for CTSK, RANKL, and OPG levels using the ELISA method. Keratinized tissue and marginal bone loss (MBL) were also noted. RESULTS: Clinical parameters statistically significantly increased in each group but did not show statistical differences between groups without PPD. Although implant groups showed a higher MBL in the upper jaw, only the standard dental group demonstrated a statistically significant difference. At 90 days, the OPG: sRANKL ratio and total amounts of CTSK for each group did not differ from baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, both short and mini dental implants were achieving the same outcomes as the standard dental implants in the early period after loading.
