Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: De Oliveira, Guilherme J., Barros, Luiz A. [UNESP], Marcantonio, Elcio [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/234301
Resumo: BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the success and survival rate of implants with different types of prosthetic connections inserted in the posterior maxilla in native bone or in sinuses previously grafted with different biomaterials. METHODS: A total of 310 implants inserted in 113 patients were evaluated, 87 of which were inserted in association with grafted maxillary sinuses (56 morse taper (MT) implants and 31 external hexagon (EH) implants) in 37 patients, and 223 implants were inserted in native bone areas (112 MT and 111 EH implants) in 76 patients. Peri-implant clinical analyses were performed (bleeding on probing, probing depth, clinical insertion level, peri-implant marginal level, and the presence of mobility or suppuration), and the radiographic bone level was evaluated. RESULTS: Two implants were lost, yielding a survival rate of 99.35%. The MT implants had lower probing depths and peri-implant bone levels than the EH implants in both grafted areas and native bone areas (P<0.05). No statistically significant differences in any parameter evaluated were found between implants inserted in native bone and those inserted in grafting areas. EH implants inserted in native bone areas showed higher peri-implantitis rates. CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the MT implants connection reduce peri-implant bone loss, but implants inserted in maxillary sinuses previously grafted with osteoconductive biomaterials do not predispose patients to periimplant bone loss.
id UNSP_358cfe054f824522168a258a11623384
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/234301
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus liftBone transplantationMaxillary sinusOsseointegrationBACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the success and survival rate of implants with different types of prosthetic connections inserted in the posterior maxilla in native bone or in sinuses previously grafted with different biomaterials. METHODS: A total of 310 implants inserted in 113 patients were evaluated, 87 of which were inserted in association with grafted maxillary sinuses (56 morse taper (MT) implants and 31 external hexagon (EH) implants) in 37 patients, and 223 implants were inserted in native bone areas (112 MT and 111 EH implants) in 76 patients. Peri-implant clinical analyses were performed (bleeding on probing, probing depth, clinical insertion level, peri-implant marginal level, and the presence of mobility or suppuration), and the radiographic bone level was evaluated. RESULTS: Two implants were lost, yielding a survival rate of 99.35%. The MT implants had lower probing depths and peri-implant bone levels than the EH implants in both grafted areas and native bone areas (P<0.05). No statistically significant differences in any parameter evaluated were found between implants inserted in native bone and those inserted in grafting areas. EH implants inserted in native bone areas showed higher peri-implantitis rates. CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the MT implants connection reduce peri-implant bone loss, but implants inserted in maxillary sinuses previously grafted with osteoconductive biomaterials do not predispose patients to periimplant bone loss.Department of Diagnosis and Surgery Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)School of Dentistry Department of Periodontology/Implantology Federal University of Uberlândia (UFU)Department of Diagnosis and Surgery Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]De Oliveira, Guilherme J.Barros, Luiz A. [UNESP]Marcantonio, Elcio [UNESP]2022-05-01T15:46:17Z2022-05-01T15:46:17Z2022-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article10-15http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2Minerva Dental and Oral Science, v. 71, n. 1, p. 10-15, 2022.2724-63372724-6329http://hdl.handle.net/11449/23430110.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-22-s2.0-85126830962Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengMinerva Dental and Oral Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-09-26T15:21:30Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/234301Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-09-26T15:21:30Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
title Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
spellingShingle Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]
Bone transplantation
Maxillary sinus
Osseointegration
title_short Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
title_full Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
title_fullStr Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
title_full_unstemmed Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
title_sort Retrospective evaluation about morse taper versus external hexagon implants placed after maxillary sinus lift
author Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]
author_facet Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]
De Oliveira, Guilherme J.
Barros, Luiz A. [UNESP]
Marcantonio, Elcio [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 De Oliveira, Guilherme J.
Barros, Luiz A. [UNESP]
Marcantonio, Elcio [UNESP]
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Barros-Filho, Luiz A. [UNESP]
De Oliveira, Guilherme J.
Barros, Luiz A. [UNESP]
Marcantonio, Elcio [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Bone transplantation
Maxillary sinus
Osseointegration
topic Bone transplantation
Maxillary sinus
Osseointegration
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the success and survival rate of implants with different types of prosthetic connections inserted in the posterior maxilla in native bone or in sinuses previously grafted with different biomaterials. METHODS: A total of 310 implants inserted in 113 patients were evaluated, 87 of which were inserted in association with grafted maxillary sinuses (56 morse taper (MT) implants and 31 external hexagon (EH) implants) in 37 patients, and 223 implants were inserted in native bone areas (112 MT and 111 EH implants) in 76 patients. Peri-implant clinical analyses were performed (bleeding on probing, probing depth, clinical insertion level, peri-implant marginal level, and the presence of mobility or suppuration), and the radiographic bone level was evaluated. RESULTS: Two implants were lost, yielding a survival rate of 99.35%. The MT implants had lower probing depths and peri-implant bone levels than the EH implants in both grafted areas and native bone areas (P<0.05). No statistically significant differences in any parameter evaluated were found between implants inserted in native bone and those inserted in grafting areas. EH implants inserted in native bone areas showed higher peri-implantitis rates. CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the MT implants connection reduce peri-implant bone loss, but implants inserted in maxillary sinuses previously grafted with osteoconductive biomaterials do not predispose patients to periimplant bone loss.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-05-01T15:46:17Z
2022-05-01T15:46:17Z
2022-02-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2
Minerva Dental and Oral Science, v. 71, n. 1, p. 10-15, 2022.
2724-6337
2724-6329
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/234301
10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2
2-s2.0-85126830962
url http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/234301
identifier_str_mv Minerva Dental and Oral Science, v. 71, n. 1, p. 10-15, 2022.
2724-6337
2724-6329
10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04533-2
2-s2.0-85126830962
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Minerva Dental and Oral Science
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 10-15
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv repositoriounesp@unesp.br
_version_ 1813546441555050496