-
All Events
IAO-EAO-SIdP joint meeting 2024EAO-DGI joint meeting 202329th Annual Scientific CongressEAO Digital Days 2021EAO Digital Days 202028th Annual Scientific Congress27th Annual Scientific Congress26th Annual Scientific Congress25th Annual Scientific Congress24th Annual Scientific Congress23rd Annual Scientific Congress -
All Content TypesAbstractArticle ReviewePosterLearning moduleLearning QuizMatching SlidePDF DocumentWebcast
-
Sort ByRelevance
Background:
The implant-abutment connection is the placement of the implant at epicrestal (bone level) or above (tissue level). The location of the micro-gap changes and thus a reaction on the biological width can be expected. There is however, only limited level of evidence on bone remodeling around different type of implants when comparing bone level to tissue level implants.
Aim/Hypothesis:
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate crestal bone changes around implants when placing the implant-abutment connection at the crestal bone level or above.
Material and Methods:
Medline (Pubmed), EMBASE and Cochran Library up to January 2014 were electronically and hand searched for any publications which evaluated radiographic crestal bone changes around non-submerged, rough surfaced implants in healed sites, humans and were loaded for a minimum of one year.
Results:
The search yielded 1122 (n=1122) publications. 1106 could not be included. 16 full text articles were read and subjected inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 were included. The mean difference was -0.29 mm (95% CI, -0.58 mm to -0.01 mm). Heterogeneity between studies was observed (I² = 95%). Significant more crestal bone change was seen in the epicrestal implant-abutment (bone level) connection group when compared to implants with the prosthetic connection above the crestal bone level (tissue level) (P < 0.00001).
Conclusions and clinical implications:
Dental implants at bone level show significant less crestal bone change after one year of loading than a tissue-level implant.
Background:
The implant-abutment connection is the placement of the implant at epicrestal (bone level) or above (tissue level). The location of the micro-gap changes and thus a reaction on the biological width can be expected. There is however, only limited level of evidence on bone remodeling around different type of implants when comparing bone level to tissue level implants.
Aim/Hypothesis:
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate crestal bone changes around implants when placing the implant-abutment connection at the crestal bone level or above.
Material and Methods:
Medline (Pubmed), EMBASE and Cochran Library up to January 2014 were electronically and hand searched for any publications which evaluated radiographic crestal bone changes around non-submerged, rough surfaced implants in healed sites, humans and were loaded for a minimum of one year.
Results:
The search yielded 1122 (n=1122) publications. 1106 could not be included. 16 full text articles were read and subjected inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 were included. The mean difference was -0.29 mm (95% CI, -0.58 mm to -0.01 mm). Heterogeneity between studies was observed (I² = 95%). Significant more crestal bone change was seen in the epicrestal implant-abutment (bone level) connection group when compared to implants with the prosthetic connection above the crestal bone level (tissue level) (P < 0.00001).
Conclusions and clinical implications:
Dental implants at bone level show significant less crestal bone change after one year of loading than a tissue-level implant.
Background:
The implant-abutment connection is the placement of the implant at epicrestal (bone level) or above (tissue level). The location of the micro-gap changes and thus a reaction on the biological width can be expected. There is however, only limited level of evidence on bone remodeling around different type of implants when comparing bone level to tissue level implants.
Aim/Hypothesis:
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate crestal bone changes around implants when placing the implant-abutment connection at the crestal bone level or above.
Material and Methods:
Medline (Pubmed), EMBASE and Cochran Library up to January 2014 were electronically and hand searched for any publications which evaluated radiographic crestal bone changes around non-submerged, rough surfaced implants in healed sites, humans and were loaded for a minimum of one year.
Results:
The search yielded 1122 (n=1122) publications. 1106 could not be included. 16 full text articles were read and subjected inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 were included. The mean difference was -0.29 mm (95% CI, -0.58 mm to -0.01 mm). Heterogeneity between studies was observed (I² = 95%). Significant more crestal bone change was seen in the epicrestal implant-abutment (bone level) connection group when compared to implants with the prosthetic connection above the crestal bone level (tissue level) (P < 0.00001).
Conclusions and clinical implications:
Dental implants at bone level show significant less crestal bone change after one year of loading than a tissue-level implant.
Background:
The implant-abutment connection is the placement of the implant at epicrestal (bone level) or above (tissue level). The location of the micro-gap changes and thus a reaction on the biological width can be expected. There is however, only limited level of evidence on bone remodeling around different type of implants when comparing bone level to tissue level implants.
Aim/Hypothesis:
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate crestal bone changes around implants when placing the implant-abutment connection at the crestal bone level or above.
Material and Methods:
Medline (Pubmed), EMBASE and Cochran Library up to January 2014 were electronically and hand searched for any publications which evaluated radiographic crestal bone changes around non-submerged, rough surfaced implants in healed sites, humans and were loaded for a minimum of one year.
Results:
The search yielded 1122 (n=1122) publications. 1106 could not be included. 16 full text articles were read and subjected inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 were included. The mean difference was -0.29 mm (95% CI, -0.58 mm to -0.01 mm). Heterogeneity between studies was observed (I² = 95%). Significant more crestal bone change was seen in the epicrestal implant-abutment (bone level) connection group when compared to implants with the prosthetic connection above the crestal bone level (tissue level) (P < 0.00001).
Conclusions and clinical implications:
Dental implants at bone level show significant less crestal bone change after one year of loading than a tissue-level implant.