Evaluation and Comparison of Crestal Bone Loss Around Dental Implants Placed Using Conventional Drilling, Bone Expansion, and Ridge Split Techniques: An In Vivo Study

采用传统钻孔法、骨扩张法和牙槽嵴劈开法植入种植体周围牙槽嵴骨吸收的评估与比较:一项体内研究

阅读:2

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Tooth loss is often followed by alveolar ridge resorption, which may compromise implant placement and long-term stability. Different implant site preparation techniques, such as conventional drilling, bone expansion, and ridge split procedures, are used to manage varying ridge conditions. These techniques may influence peri-implant bone remodeling in different ways. This study aimed to evaluate and compare crestal bone loss around dental implants placed using conventional drilling, bone expansion, and ridge split techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective clinical comparative study included 72 implant sites in patients aged 25-55 years who required implant-supported rehabilitation. The implant sites were divided into three groups based on the implant site preparation technique used: conventional drilling (CD), bone expansion (BE), and ridge split (RS), with 24 implants in each group. Crestal bone levels were evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography immediately after implant placement and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. Mesial and distal crestal bone loss were measured and analyzed statistically using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey's post hoc test for intergroup comparisons and repeated-measures ANOVA for intragroup comparisons. Categorical variables were compared with the chi-square test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Crestal bone loss increased progressively over time in all three groups. Intergroup comparison revealed statistically significant differences in both mesial and distal crestal bone loss at 3, 6, and 12 months (p < 0.001). The ridge split group demonstrated the highest bone loss, followed by the bone expansion group, while the conventional drilling group showed the least bone loss at all time intervals. Pairwise comparisons between all groups were also statistically significant (p < 0.001). Intragroup analysis showed a significant increase in crestal bone loss over time within each group (p < 0.001), except for the comparison between 6 and 12 months in the conventional drilling group, which was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).  Conclusion: Implant site preparation techniques significantly influence peri-implant crestal bone remodeling. Conventional drilling demonstrated the least crestal bone loss, whereas ridge split procedures showed greater bone remodeling during the follow-up period.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。