We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33 (2018), No. 5     4. Oct. 2018
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33 (2018), No. 5  (04.10.2018)

Page 1119-1125, doi:10.11607/jomi.6641, PubMed:30231100


Peri-implant Bone Loss of Tissue-Level and Bone-Level Implants in the Esthetic Zone with Gingival Biotype Analysis
Wallner, Gwendolin / Rieder, Dominik / Wichmann, Manfred Gerhard / Heckmann, Siegfried Martin
Purpose: The esthetic outcome of dental implants can be compromised when some degree of bone loss occurs around the implant. This may particularly affect the tissue-level (TL) design. Therefore, bone-level (BL) design implants may be preferable if a natural emergence profile is important. Notwithstanding the implant design, the gingival biotype has been identified as a crucial factor in the stability of crestal bone. The objective of this study was to investigate bone loss in patients with different gingival biotypes at TL and BL implant sites in the esthetic zone.
Materials and Methods: In 41 patients, 20 TL and 22 BL implant procedures were carried out. Intraoral radiographs of all of the 42 sites were taken immediately after implant insertion as well as during the follow-up examination. The analysis of bone height was conducted using a computerized technique. The TRAN method was used to determine the gingival biotype.
Results: After a mean in situ period of 4.9 years in the TL group, 12 implants with a thick biotype had a mean bone loss of 0.21 mm (SD: 0.43 mm). The eight implants with a thin biotype had a loss of 0.05 mm (SD: 0.47 mm; P = .31). After a mean in situ period of 1.9 years, the 14 BL sites with a thick biotype showed a mean bone change of -0.03 mm (SD: 0.38 mm). In the eight implants with a thin biotype, a change of +0.09 mm (SD: 0.32 mm; P = .84) was noted.
Conclusion: Analysis of the obtained results did not reveal a dependency of bone height on implant design or on gingival biotype. However, prior to choosing an implant design, it may nevertheless be beneficial to screen for transparent soft tissues, where the BL design offers a more natural emergence profile. For this purpose, the TRAN method is clearly the fastest and easiest.

Keywords: biotype, bone-level design, esthetic zone, peri-implant bone loss, radiographic analysis, tissue-level design