Background
Implant surface characteristic have a relevant influence on the healing process around implants early stages. The healing period for conventional rough surfaces is the, at least, 8 weeks. Animal studies show that thermo.chemically treated implants are able to enhance the osseointegration process at early phases, so they could be load three to four weeks after placement.
Aims
The aim of the study is to assess the differences in bone level change and implant stability quotient between immediate and early loaded implants with thermo-chemically treated surface, after one year of healing. The null hipothesis is that there is no differences bwtween the two loading protocols.
Methods
This randomized controled clinical trial included patients with missing teeth in posterior sectors. Patients were randomly assigned to one of these two groups: A (inmediate- loaded implanst ) or B (early-loaded implants – 4 weeks). The definitive abutments were placed at the time of the surgery. Changes at crestal bone level were assessed (on the mesial and distal aspects of each) implant on customized periapical radiographs, which were taken on the day of surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The stability of the implants (assessed by resonance frequency analysis) is also registered at ecah visit.For comparison of variables between both groups the parametric Student t or ANOVA tests and the Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon nonparametric test were used When significant diferences were obtained, 95% confidence intervals were determined
Results
A total of 35 implants (18 inmediate- loaded implants and 17 early-loaded implants) in twenty-one patients were placed. No differences in primary stability between groups were observed (72 ± 8 in group A, 67,3 ± 9,2 in group B). No significant changes of ISQ values were found between baseline and 4 weeks (73,3 ± 9,8 in group A, 66,9 ± 7 in group B ) in any of the groups.). A significant progressive increase of ISQ values from baseline to 1-year visit (85,3± 10,6in group A, 76,5 ± 9,9 in group B ) was recorded in both groups with no significant difference between them. No statistically significant differences were found between immediate and early loading group crestal bone level (0.3±0.5mm vs. 0.6±0.8 mm) values.
Conclusions
Immediate and early loading protocols of implants with thermo-chemically treated surface at posterior areas seems to be predictably used in daily practice.
Background
Implant surface characteristic have a relevant influence on the healing process around implants early stages. The healing period for conventional rough surfaces is the, at least, 8 weeks. Animal studies show that thermo.chemically treated implants are able to enhance the osseointegration process at early phases, so they could be load three to four weeks after placement.
Aims
The aim of the study is to assess the differences in bone level change and implant stability quotient between immediate and early loaded implants with thermo-chemically treated surface, after one year of healing. The null hipothesis is that there is no differences bwtween the two loading protocols.
Methods
This randomized controled clinical trial included patients with missing teeth in posterior sectors. Patients were randomly assigned to one of these two groups: A (inmediate- loaded implanst ) or B (early-loaded implants – 4 weeks). The definitive abutments were placed at the time of the surgery. Changes at crestal bone level were assessed (on the mesial and distal aspects of each) implant on customized periapical radiographs, which were taken on the day of surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The stability of the implants (assessed by resonance frequency analysis) is also registered at ecah visit.For comparison of variables between both groups the parametric Student t or ANOVA tests and the Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon nonparametric test were used When significant diferences were obtained, 95% confidence intervals were determined
Results
A total of 35 implants (18 inmediate- loaded implants and 17 early-loaded implants) in twenty-one patients were placed. No differences in primary stability between groups were observed (72 ± 8 in group A, 67,3 ± 9,2 in group B). No significant changes of ISQ values were found between baseline and 4 weeks (73,3 ± 9,8 in group A, 66,9 ± 7 in group B ) in any of the groups.). A significant progressive increase of ISQ values from baseline to 1-year visit (85,3± 10,6in group A, 76,5 ± 9,9 in group B ) was recorded in both groups with no significant difference between them. No statistically significant differences were found between immediate and early loading group crestal bone level (0.3±0.5mm vs. 0.6±0.8 mm) values.
Conclusions
Immediate and early loading protocols of implants with thermo-chemically treated surface at posterior areas seems to be predictably used in daily practice.
Background
Implant surface characteristic have a relevant influence on the healing process around implants early stages. The healing period for conventional rough surfaces is the, at least, 8 weeks. Animal studies show that thermo.chemically treated implants are able to enhance the osseointegration process at early phases, so they could be load three to four weeks after placement.
Aims
The aim of the study is to assess the differences in bone level change and implant stability quotient between immediate and early loaded implants with thermo-chemically treated surface, after one year of healing. The null hipothesis is that there is no differences bwtween the two loading protocols.
Methods
This randomized controled clinical trial included patients with missing teeth in posterior sectors. Patients were randomly assigned to one of these two groups: A (inmediate- loaded implanst ) or B (early-loaded implants – 4 weeks). The definitive abutments were placed at the time of the surgery. Changes at crestal bone level were assessed (on the mesial and distal aspects of each) implant on customized periapical radiographs, which were taken on the day of surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The stability of the implants (assessed by resonance frequency analysis) is also registered at ecah visit.For comparison of variables between both groups the parametric Student t or ANOVA tests and the Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon nonparametric test were used When significant diferences were obtained, 95% confidence intervals were determined
Results
A total of 35 implants (18 inmediate- loaded implants and 17 early-loaded implants) in twenty-one patients were placed. No differences in primary stability between groups were observed (72 ± 8 in group A, 67,3 ± 9,2 in group B). No significant changes of ISQ values were found between baseline and 4 weeks (73,3 ± 9,8 in group A, 66,9 ± 7 in group B ) in any of the groups.). A significant progressive increase of ISQ values from baseline to 1-year visit (85,3± 10,6in group A, 76,5 ± 9,9 in group B ) was recorded in both groups with no significant difference between them. No statistically significant differences were found between immediate and early loading group crestal bone level (0.3±0.5mm vs. 0.6±0.8 mm) values.
Conclusions
Immediate and early loading protocols of implants with thermo-chemically treated surface at posterior areas seems to be predictably used in daily practice.
Background
Implant surface characteristic have a relevant influence on the healing process around implants early stages. The healing period for conventional rough surfaces is the, at least, 8 weeks. Animal studies show that thermo.chemically treated implants are able to enhance the osseointegration process at early phases, so they could be load three to four weeks after placement.
Aims
The aim of the study is to assess the differences in bone level change and implant stability quotient between immediate and early loaded implants with thermo-chemically treated surface, after one year of healing. The null hipothesis is that there is no differences bwtween the two loading protocols.
Methods
This randomized controled clinical trial included patients with missing teeth in posterior sectors. Patients were randomly assigned to one of these two groups: A (inmediate- loaded implanst ) or B (early-loaded implants – 4 weeks). The definitive abutments were placed at the time of the surgery. Changes at crestal bone level were assessed (on the mesial and distal aspects of each) implant on customized periapical radiographs, which were taken on the day of surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The stability of the implants (assessed by resonance frequency analysis) is also registered at ecah visit.For comparison of variables between both groups the parametric Student t or ANOVA tests and the Mann-Whitney or Wilcoxon nonparametric test were used When significant diferences were obtained, 95% confidence intervals were determined
Results
A total of 35 implants (18 inmediate- loaded implants and 17 early-loaded implants) in twenty-one patients were placed. No differences in primary stability between groups were observed (72 ± 8 in group A, 67,3 ± 9,2 in group B). No significant changes of ISQ values were found between baseline and 4 weeks (73,3 ± 9,8 in group A, 66,9 ± 7 in group B ) in any of the groups.). A significant progressive increase of ISQ values from baseline to 1-year visit (85,3± 10,6in group A, 76,5 ± 9,9 in group B ) was recorded in both groups with no significant difference between them. No statistically significant differences were found between immediate and early loading group crestal bone level (0.3±0.5mm vs. 0.6±0.8 mm) values.
Conclusions
Immediate and early loading protocols of implants with thermo-chemically treated surface at posterior areas seems to be predictably used in daily practice.