Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-12-06, 12:03:50 | version 1.38.0
| research Authors (year) Aims of the study Survival rate (%) Company Follow-up Roccuzzo et al. (2008) Assessment of the peri-implant condition, early loading Van Velzen et al. (2015) Long-term survival and incidence of peri-implant disease Strietzel et al. (2011) Artzi et al. (2010) Ormianer et al. (2016) Comparison of immediately loaded implants (different implant insertion times) Success rate of implants loaded immediately after implantation (post-extraction or healed alveoli) Comparison of long-term bone loss around dental implants with three different thread designs 100 99.7 98.2 96.9 96.3 Straumann Straumann Alpha-Bio Tec 5 years 10 years 2.5 years (median) Alpha-Bio Tec 3 years Alpha-Bio Tec 107 months (mean) Kohen et al. (2016) Comparison of different insertion and loading protocols 95.6 Alpha-Bio Tec, Zimmer Dental, BioHorizons IPH 107 months (mean) Table 2 Tab. 2: Clinical success rate of SLA-treated dental implants. regardless of the time of insertion (immediate or delayed), the general survival of these rough-sur- faced implants was 98.2 % at follow-up after a median of 2.5 years. Artzi et al. reported high success rates with imme- diately loaded, fixed provisional prostheses sup- ported by root form or spiral-shaped Alpha-Bio Tec implants.51 Of the 676 implants, only 21 (3.1 %) were removed owing to failed osseointegration. The effect of three different implant macrostructure designs on marginal bone loss was compared by Ormianer et al.52 They investigated 1,361 implants and found the sur- vival rate to be 96.3 %. In their study, one-piece V-thread design implants were associated with the least bone loss and the highest survival rate, probably owing to the absence of micro-gaps between the im- plant and the abutment. Finally, Kohen et al. reported high implant survival (95.6 %) and minimal bone loss (2.03 mm) in a sample of 1,688 implants, 75 % of which were manufactured by Alpha-Bio Tec.53 These success rates suggest that the biocompatibility of SLA implants is superior (Tab. 2). Conclusion The excellent biocompatibility and physicochemi- cal properties of Ti dental implants position Ti as the gold standard in implant dentistry. While the safety and success of Grade 4 Ti is well documented, Grade 5 offers better physical properties and similarly out- standing biocompatibility and survival. As for the various surface modifications, SLA appears to com- bine the advantages of the physical and chemical methods successfully, making it a favourable alterna- tive. High levels of osseointegration and favourable long-term survival of SLA dental implants were confirmed by several in vitro and clinical studies. Based on the current literature, we can conclude that Grade 5 Ti with SLA-modified surfaces assures the best dental implantation outcomes. Hypersensitivity or allergic reactions to Ti or other alloy ingredients are extremely rare but still occur, necessitating that the implant dentist be aware of this possibility and pay special attention to the patient’s history._ Literature Author details Author details contact Dr Roland Masa Department of Oral Biology and Experimental Dental Research Faculty of Dentistry University of Szeged Tisza Lajos körút 64–66 6720 Szeged, Hungary Tel.: +36 62 545283 Dr Gábor Braunitzer dicomLAB Ltd. Pulz utca 46/b. 6724 Szeged, Hungary Tel.: +36 62 737304 10 implants 4 2017