A radiographic comparison of crestal bone loss around one-staged and two-staged implants. An invivo study

Gautami Pal, Thilak Shetty, J. Rodrigues Shobha, Saldanha Sharon, Umesh Y. Pai, Mahesh, Hegde Puneeth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the crestal bone loss (CBL) around implants placed in a submerged or non submerged procedure using radiovisiography. Materials and Method: Implants were placed in the posterior mandible in a split mouth study design. In each edentulous area one implant was inserted using a nonsubmerged procedure (Group 1) where healing abutments were placed after implant installation and in the other implant was placed using a conventional surgical approach (Group 2). A total of 10 implants were placed in 5 patients. Standardized radiovisiographs were taken immediately after implant insertion, 3 months after implant placement, and 6 months after implant placement. The data were analyzed using ImageJ software and subjected to paired t-test. Results. Three and 6 months after implant placement, the one-stage implants showed significantly more CBL (0.43±.04mm), (0.3±.06mm) than two-stage implants (0.35±07mm), (0.2±.02mm) respectively. Significant differences were found in terms of CBL in the treatment groups being investigated. Conclusion: One-stage implants showed significantly more CBL than two-stage implants.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)596-601
Number of pages6
JournalIndian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-10-2019

Fingerprint

Bone
Bone and Bones
Group
Mandible
Mouth
Software
Therapeutics
software

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Toxicology
  • Law
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

@article{d4564b606e8e48dd91c0609ab9f35ce1,
title = "A radiographic comparison of crestal bone loss around one-staged and two-staged implants.: An invivo study",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the crestal bone loss (CBL) around implants placed in a submerged or non submerged procedure using radiovisiography. Materials and Method: Implants were placed in the posterior mandible in a split mouth study design. In each edentulous area one implant was inserted using a nonsubmerged procedure (Group 1) where healing abutments were placed after implant installation and in the other implant was placed using a conventional surgical approach (Group 2). A total of 10 implants were placed in 5 patients. Standardized radiovisiographs were taken immediately after implant insertion, 3 months after implant placement, and 6 months after implant placement. The data were analyzed using ImageJ software and subjected to paired t-test. Results. Three and 6 months after implant placement, the one-stage implants showed significantly more CBL (0.43±.04mm), (0.3±.06mm) than two-stage implants (0.35±07mm), (0.2±.02mm) respectively. Significant differences were found in terms of CBL in the treatment groups being investigated. Conclusion: One-stage implants showed significantly more CBL than two-stage implants.",
author = "Gautami Pal and Thilak Shetty and {Rodrigues Shobha}, J. and Saldanha Sharon and Pai, {Umesh Y.} and Mahesh and Hegde Puneeth",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00356.6",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "596--601",
journal = "Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology",
issn = "0973-9122",
publisher = "Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A radiographic comparison of crestal bone loss around one-staged and two-staged implants.

T2 - An invivo study

AU - Pal, Gautami

AU - Shetty, Thilak

AU - Rodrigues Shobha, J.

AU - Sharon, Saldanha

AU - Pai, Umesh Y.

AU - Mahesh,

AU - Puneeth, Hegde

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare the crestal bone loss (CBL) around implants placed in a submerged or non submerged procedure using radiovisiography. Materials and Method: Implants were placed in the posterior mandible in a split mouth study design. In each edentulous area one implant was inserted using a nonsubmerged procedure (Group 1) where healing abutments were placed after implant installation and in the other implant was placed using a conventional surgical approach (Group 2). A total of 10 implants were placed in 5 patients. Standardized radiovisiographs were taken immediately after implant insertion, 3 months after implant placement, and 6 months after implant placement. The data were analyzed using ImageJ software and subjected to paired t-test. Results. Three and 6 months after implant placement, the one-stage implants showed significantly more CBL (0.43±.04mm), (0.3±.06mm) than two-stage implants (0.35±07mm), (0.2±.02mm) respectively. Significant differences were found in terms of CBL in the treatment groups being investigated. Conclusion: One-stage implants showed significantly more CBL than two-stage implants.

AB - Purpose: To compare the crestal bone loss (CBL) around implants placed in a submerged or non submerged procedure using radiovisiography. Materials and Method: Implants were placed in the posterior mandible in a split mouth study design. In each edentulous area one implant was inserted using a nonsubmerged procedure (Group 1) where healing abutments were placed after implant installation and in the other implant was placed using a conventional surgical approach (Group 2). A total of 10 implants were placed in 5 patients. Standardized radiovisiographs were taken immediately after implant insertion, 3 months after implant placement, and 6 months after implant placement. The data were analyzed using ImageJ software and subjected to paired t-test. Results. Three and 6 months after implant placement, the one-stage implants showed significantly more CBL (0.43±.04mm), (0.3±.06mm) than two-stage implants (0.35±07mm), (0.2±.02mm) respectively. Significant differences were found in terms of CBL in the treatment groups being investigated. Conclusion: One-stage implants showed significantly more CBL than two-stage implants.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075748551&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075748551&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00356.6

DO - 10.5958/0973-9130.2019.00356.6

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85075748551

VL - 13

SP - 596

EP - 601

JO - Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology

JF - Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology

SN - 0973-9122

IS - 4

ER -