A clinical retrospective study on Osstem MS one-stage implant restoration of small edentulous space in the mandibular anterior region
10.3969/j.issn.1001-3733.2015.05.009
- VernacularTitle:Osstem MS 一段式种植体用于下前牙小间隙种植修复的临床回顾研究
- Author:
Yan GAO
;
Shulan XU
;
Lei ZHOU
;
Shuo YANG
;
Zhen ZHOU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Mandibular anterior region;
Small edentulous space;
Implant prosthesis
- From:
Journal of Practical Stomatology
2015;(5):639-643
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To assess the clinical efficacy of two different diameter Osstem MS one-stage implant restoration of small edentu-lous space in the mandibular anterior region.Methods:85 patients were treated by Osstem MS one-stage implant with the diameter of 2.5 mm(n =66)and 3.0 mm(n =66)respectively for the restoration of small edentulous space in mandibular anterior region.The mesi-al and distal marginal bone level and soft tissue were statistically analyzed after 1 2 and 24 months of functional load.The implant survival rate was evaluated according to Wheeler's survival criteria.Results:The survival rate of the implants was 1 00%.The mean changes in marginal bone level(mm)on the mesial side of 2.5 mm and 3.0 mm diameter implants were 0.275 ±0.638 and 0.098 ±0.31 9,distal aspects were 0.360 ±0.588 and 0.1 09 ±0.323 after 1 2 months of functional load;while 0.299 ±0.672 and 0.099 ±0.31 8,0.381 ± 0.581 and 0.1 07 ±0.31 9 after 24 months of functional load.The mesial and distal marginal bone loss of 2.5 mm diameter implant was greater than that of 3.0 mm after 1 2 and 24 months of functional load(P <0.05).No significant change on the marginal bone level was found aomog the same diameter implants from 1 2 to 24 month observation(P >0.05).No relevant complication of peri-implant soft tissue was shown.Conclusion:Favorable clinical effects including function and aesthetics can be achieved by Osstem MS one-stage implant with the diameter of 2.5 mm or 3.0 mm for the restoration of small edentulous space in the mandibular anterior region,however,the mar-ginal bone loss was greater around 2.5 mm diameter implant.
