Implant Tribune Italian Edition

FIRS T EDITION | MARCH 2014 R&D MAGAZINE 2 Immediate occlusal loading of tapered internal Laser-Lok® implants in partial arch applica- tion: A 24-months clinical and radiographic study. M Grande, A Ceccherini, M Serra, L Bava, D Farronato, V Iorio-Siciliano, R Guarnieri J Osseointegr 2013;5(2) Influence of Laser-Lok® surface on immediate functional loading of implants in single tooth replacement: a 2-years prospective clinical study. D Farronato, F Mangano, F Briguglio, V Iorio-Siciliano, R Guarnieri Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014 Jan-Feb;34(1):79-89 BACKGROUND Recently, new implant surfaces have been proposed in an effort to improve hard and soft tissue integration, which may be beneficial in immediate loading situations. AIM The purpose of the present prospective clin- ical study was to, during 2 years, clinically and radiographically evaluate an implant with laser microtextured collar surface placed for imme- diate loading of fixed prostheses in cases of partial posterior maxillary and/or mandibular edentulism. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-five partially edentulous patients who needed implant treatment and met inclusion criteria were consecutively enrolled at different study- centers in Italy. A total of 107 Tapered Internal Laser-Lok implants (49 maxillary and 58 mandibular) were placed and immediately loaded. All provisional constructions were deliv- ered within 1 hour, and the final constructions placed after 4 months. A total of 32 prosthet- ic constructions, consisting of 10 two-units, 12 three-units, and 10 four-units restorations, were ABSTRACT The purpose of the present clinical study was to evaluate the influence of Laser-Lok® micro- texturing surface on clinical attachment level and crestal bone remodeling around immediate fun- ctional loaded implants in single-tooth replace- ment in the area of 15–25 and 35–45. MATERIALS AND METHODS Seventy-seven patients were included in a pro- spective, randomized study and divided in two groups: in the control group BioHorizons Tapered Internal non-Laser-Lok® -type (NLL; n=39) implants were used, while in test group BioHorizons Tape- red Internal Laser-Lok® -type (LL; n=39) was used. Crestal bone loss (CBL), and clinical parameters including clinical attachment level (CAL), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BOP), were recorded at baseline examinations (BSL) and 6 (T1), 12 (T2), and 24 months (T3) after loading with the final restoration. RESULTS One implants was lost in the control group, and evaluated. Implants were monitored for clinical and radiographic outcomes at follow-up exami- nations scheduled for 6, 12, 24 months. RESULTS Five implants have been lost after loading (3 implants in a two-unit maxillary restorations, 1 implant in a two-unit mandibular restoration, and 1 implant in three-unit maxillary resto- ration) giving a survival rate of 95.4% after 24 months. Mean marginal bone loss 6,12, and 24 months after installation was of 0.42mm ± 1.1mm, 0.52mm ± 0.9mm, and 0.66mm ±1.3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Although limited to the short follow-up, imme- diate function with Tapered Internal Laser-Lok® implants seems to be a viable option to treated partially edentulous patients. Length and Diameter of 107 Inserted Implants Diameter mm Length mm Mandible Maxilla Total Number 3.8 9 4 2 6 3.8 10.5 6 4 10 3.8 12 8 6 14 3.8 15 7 5 12 4.6 9 12 8 20 4.6 10.5 8 14 22 4.6 12 7 8 15 4.6 15 6 2 8 Prosthesis distribution according to the number of units Mandible Maxilla Total Two units 6 4 10 Three units 6 6 12 Four units 7 3 10 Tab. V Mean Marginal Bone Loss (mm) Mandible Maxilla Total Total T1 0.43± 0,9 0.45 ± 1.3 0.43 ± 1.1 T2 0.51 ± 0,8 0.53 ± 1.0 0.52 ± 0.9 T3 0.68 ± 1,5 0.64 ± 1.1 0.66 ± 1.3 Crestal Bone Loss (mm) BSL T1 T2 T3 NLL 0.39±0.17 0.80±0.31 1.02±0.29 1.07±0.30 LL 0.19±0.13 0.36±0.20 0.41±0.27 0.49±0.34 Mean values and SD t=2.7338, p=0.0340, the difference between the observed means is significant for p <0.05 one in the test group, giving a total survival rate of 96,1% after 2 years. PI and BOP outcomes were found similar for both implant types without stati- stical differences. A mean CAL loss of 1.10mm ± 0.51mm was observed during the first 2 years in the NLL group, while the mean CAL loss observed in LL the group was 0.56mm ± 0.33mm. Radio- graphically, NLL group implants showed a mean crestal bone loss of 1.07mm ± 0.30mm compared to 0.49mm ± 0.34mm for the LL. CONCLUSIONS The type of implants did not influence the survi- val rate, whereas LL resulted in greater CAL and in shallower radiographic peri-implant CBL than NLL.