• Users Online: 571
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 21  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 74-80

A randomized clinical study to compare implant stability and bone loss using early loading protocol in two implant systems with different design


Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Kamleshwar Singh
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_297_20

Rights and Permissions

Aims: The study compared changes in implant stability and bone loss of implants with different designs using early loading at 6 weeks. Setting and Design: In vivo-comparative study. Materials and Methods: Forty subjects were selected and divided randomly by sealed envelope method in Group X and Group A for early loading for missing single posterior tooth in mandible. Implants in Group X had flared crest module and buttress thread design, whereas implants in Group A had parallel crest module and V-shaped thread design. All subjects were evaluated by Ostell for implant stability at the interval of baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. ImageJ software was used for measurement of crestal bone loss in intraoral periapical radiographs at the interval of 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Statistical Analysis Used: Unpaired t test, repeated ANOVA, Tukey post hoc test. Results: The mean bone loss values of Group X at predetermined interval were 1.51 ± 0.20 mm, 2.11 ± 0.21 mm and 2.13 ± 0.21 mm. The mean bone loss values of Group A were 1.79 ± 0.16 mm, 2.92 ± 0.23 mm and 2.95 ± 0.23 mm. The mean bone loss was statistical significant (P < 0.05) at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. It was highly significant in Group A at 6 months (P < 0.001). Conclusions: It was concluded that Group X implants design showed better implant stability and less bone loss when compared to Group A implants design.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed206    
    Printed10    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded41    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal