Effect of Platform Shift/Switch on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile Following Flapless Surgery and Crestal/Subcrestal Implant Placement
Effect of Platform Shift/Switch on Crestal Bone Levels and Mucosal Profile Following Flapless Surgery and Crestal/Subcrestal Implant Placement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cid.12243
复制
发表时间：
2016-02-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Susin, Cristiano
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lee, Jaebum;Fiorini, Tiago;Susin, Cristiano
背景牙槽骨重建/骨丢失是牙种植术后常见的并发症。一些假说和临床策略已被提出来解释和避免牙槽嵴重塑;但是，在此情况下，病因机制尚不清楚，临床方案的有效性也不确定。目的本研究的目的是提供牙槽嵴与牙槽嵴下种植体放置对牙槽嵴重塑和粘膜轮廓的组织学记录，比较平台移位/在5只成年雄性猎犬的左右无齿后下颌骨中分别植入4个牙种植体，拉布拉多杂种犬使用不翻瓣入路，包括牙槽嵴与牙槽嵴下放置，以及使用平台移位与标准基台。块活检收集组织学/histometric分析后，8周愈合interval.ResultsBoth嵴和subcrestal种植体安装导致显着的嵴重塑和骨丢失，特别是在颊部网站，平台转移/开关和标准基台之间没有显着差异。种植体安装在牙槽嵴下时，其粘膜轮廓明显高于牙槽嵴水平种植体，而平台移位/转换和标准基台之间无显著差异;在所有的时间停止在基台表面上的上皮附着。ConclusionsComparing platform shift/switch vs. standard abutments using a minimally invasive flapless approach including crestal or subcrestal implant placement，平台移动/转换支座没有提供优于标准支座的选择性优点。
BackgroundCrestal remodeling/bone loss appears a common sequel to dental implant placement. Several hypotheses and clinical strategies have been advanced to explain and avert crestal remodeling; however, causative mechanisms remain unclear and the efficacy of clinical protocol uncertain.ObjectiveThe objective of the present study was to provide a histologic record of crestal versus subcrestal implant placement on crestal remodeling and mucosal profile comparing platform shift/switch and standard abutments following flapless implant surgery using a dog model.MethodsFour dental implants each were placed into the left and right edentulated posterior mandibles in five adult male hound-Labrador mongrel dogs using a flapless approach including crestal versus subcrestal placement and using platform shift versus standard abutments. Block biopsies were collected for histological/histometric analysis following an 8-week healing interval.ResultsBoth crestal and subcrestal implant installation resulted in significant crestal remodeling and bone loss, in particular at buccal sites, without significant differences between platform shift/switch and standard abutments. Implants installed subcrestally exhibited a significantly taller mucosal profile over crestal-level implants without significant differences between platform shift/switch and standard abutments; the epithelial attachment at all times arrested on the abutment surface.ConclusionsComparing platform shift/switch versus standard abutments using a minimally invasive flapless approach including crestal or subcrestal implant placement, the platform shift/switch abutments offer no selective advantage over standard abutments.