Objective To provide basis for cl inical appl ication of ANKYLOS dental implants by following up alveolar bone status of 318 pieces of restored ANKYLOS dental implants. Methods Between February 2008 and August 2009, 170 patients with dentition defect underwent placement of ANKYLOS dental implants (318 pieces). There were 74 males (133 pieces) and 96 females (185 pieces) with an average age of 43.8 years (range, 23-68 years). After operation, the periapicalX-ray films were taken to observe osseointegration around the neck of implant, alveolar bone resorption, and survival ofimplants. Results All patients were followed up at 6, 12, and 24 months after operation. There were 9 failure implants witha total dental implants survival rate of 97.17% (309/318): 3 at 6 months, 4 at 6-12 months, and 2 at 12-24 months, showing no significant difference in dental implants survival rate among 3 time points (χ2=0.470 3, P=0.492 8). New bone formed around the neck of implant in 4 cases at 6 months and in 31 cases at 12 months; at 6, 12, and 24 months, the bone increase was (0.392 7 ± 0.217 4), (0.633 5 ± 0.202 1), and (0.709 0 ± 0.199 1) mm, respectively, showing significant differences among 3 time points (P lt; 0.05). At 6, 12, and 24 months after operation, the bone loss of other patients was (0.392 7 ± 0.217 4), (0.716 7 ± 0.220 3), and (0.723 2 ± 0.215 4) mm, respectively, showing significant differences among 3 time points (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion After restoration with ANKYLOS dental implant, alveolar bone status is good and the implant success rate is high during short-term follow-up. But further observation and study are required for long-term effectivness.
To evaluate the effect of technique combination of implant-retented titanium lattice with decalcified dental matrix (DDM) implanting. Methods Six healthy male dogs (weighing of 10-20 kg) were randomly divided into 3 groups. All the premolars were extracted on both sides of the jaw in dogs. After 2 weeks, titanium lattice and implant were implanted in the maxillary premolar region with DDM on one side (experimental group), but without on the other side (control group) of each dog. After 4, 9 and 14 weeks, respectively, 2 animals were individually killed each time, and the samples wereevaluated by general observation, X-ray examination, histological observation and histomorphometric analyses. Results General observation: Among the 6 dogs, there was no postoperative infection or death. The X-ray examination showed that the bone density of the experimental group was greater than the control group at 4 and 9 weeks, and had no significant difference as to the vicinity bone at 14 weeks. On the other hand, the density of the control group was very low under the titanium lattice and around the implant. The experimental group revealed a ridge augment of (1.93 ± 0.24) mm, and control group (-1.02 ± 1.20) mm (P lt; 0.05). Developed bone sponge could be found after 14 weeks. Histological observation showed that in the experimental group, the DDM surface was nearly absorbed at 4 weeks. A few new bones were formed at 9 weeks. The whole DDM was absorbed; the trabecular bone was thick and arranged regularly; and the intergradations of implant were observed at 14 weeks. In the control group, there were some inflammatory fibers around the neck of implant at 4 weeks. The inflammatory condition extended to the root of implant and the titanium lattice at 9 weeks. There was no newly-formed bone under the titanium lattice at 14 weeks. Histomorphometric analyses showed that the implant contact bone ratio approached 1 ∶ 1, and showed no significant difference between the new bone fragment and former bone fragment in the experimental group. Conclusion This augmentation of alveolar ridge evaluated by the study is appl icable, but further study is necessary.
Objective To use a meta-analytic technique to estimate the survival of implants between immediate loading/early loading and delayed loading. Methods We carried out a systematic search of electronic databases for all prospective trials comparing conventional delayed implant loading with early or immediate implant loading, reported between 1997 and 2007. The outcome of interest was implant failure rate. Quality assessment was performed for prospective trials that met the eligibility criteria and the data were then extracted and analyzed. Results Sixteen articles were found to meet the eligibility criteria, but two studies were reported in four articles, so that 14 articles were analyzed. There were five randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Compared to delayed loading, implant failure occurred sl ightly, but not statistically significant,less often with early implant loading (OR=0.54, 95%CI 0.22 to 1.33, P =0.18). We combined all cohort studies and this analysis was consistent with this result. Immediate implant loading was associated with slightly, but not statistically significant, worse outcomes (OR=1.51, 95%CI 0.53 to 4.25, P =0.44). We only pooled the RCTs and results showed better implant success rate with immediate implant loading, but with no significant difference. When sensitivity analyses were performed by the sequential dropping of a single study, no significant differences were observed except when the study of Jo et al was excluded. Conclusion Early implant loading was associated with better outcomes compared to delayed loading when the implants were placed into good quality bone. There was no significant difference of the implant success rate between immediate loading and delayed loading. Further evaluations in adequately powered large RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of resorbable membrane and non-resorbable membrane in dental implant to guide bone regeneration.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, VIP, CNKI and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the efficacy of resorbable membrane and non-resorbable membrane in dental implant to guide bone regeneration from inception to February 20th, 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 22 RCTs involving 1 995 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the resorbable membrane group was superior to non-resorbable membrane group in terms of repair success (RR=1.21, 95%CI 1.17 to 1.26, P<0.000 01), the bone thickness (MD=0.40, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.43, P<0.000 01), bone graft thickness(MD=0.40, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.46, P<0.000 01), patient satisfaction (RR=1.19, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.36, P=0.009), histological evaluation in bone contact (MD=4.82, 95%CI 0.14 to 9.50, P=0.04) and the total mineralized tissue (MD=3.73, 95%CI 0.32 to 7.14, P=0.03). They also had lower adverse reaction rate(RR=0.28, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.39, P<0.000 01) and changes of bone defect width from preoperative to 6 months postoperatively (MD=−0.62, 95%CI −0.93 to −0.31, P<0.000 01) with statistically significant differences. However, there was no significant difference in histological evaluation of non-mineralized tissue(MD=−2.48, 95%CI −5.81 to 0.85, P=0.14) between two groups.ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that the resorbable membrane has better repairing effects, for which helps to promote the development of bone and bone graft, reduce the incidence of adverse reactions, which has good safety and effectiveness. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify above conclusion.