Prospective randomized clinical trial of hydrophilic tapered implant placement at maxillary posterior area: 6 weeks and 12 weeks loading.
- Author:
Seong Beom KIM
1
;
Pil Young YUN
;
Sang Yun KIM
;
Yang Jin YI
;
Ji Yun KIM
;
Young Kyun KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Clinical Trial ; Original Article
- Keywords: Hydrophilicity; Dental implant; Survival rate
- MeSH: Dental Implants; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions; Mandible; Maxilla; Mentors; Prognosis; Prospective Studies*; Survival Rate; Torque
- From:The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics 2016;8(5):396-403
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Early loading of implant can be determined by excellent primary stability and characteristic of implant surface. The implant system with recently improved surface can have load application 4-6 weeks after installing in maxilla and mandible. This study evaluated the effect of healing period to the stability of hydrophilic tapered-type implant at maxillary posterior area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 30 patients treated by hydrophilic tapered-type implants (total 41 implants at maxilla) and classified by two groups depending on healing period. Group 1 (11 patients, 15 implants) was a control group and the healing period was 12 weeks, and Group 2 (19 patients, 26 implants) was test group and the healing period was 6 weeks. Immediately after implant placement, at the first impression taking, implant stability was measured using Osstell Mentor. The patients also took periapical radiographs after restoration delivery, 12 months after restoration and final followup period. The marginal bone loss around the implants was measured using the periapical radiographs. RESULTS: All implants were survived and success rate was 97.56%. The marginal bone loss was less than 1mm after 1 year postoperatively except the one implant. The stabilities of the implants were not correlated with age, healing period until loading, insertion torque (IT), the diameter of fixture and the location of implant. Only the quality of bone in group 2 (6 week) was correlated with the stability of implant. CONCLUSION: Healing period of 6 weeks can make the similar clinical prognosis of implants to that of healing period of 12 weeks if bone quality is carefully considered in case of early loading.
