Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Bone density at implant sites and its relationship to assessment of bone quality and treatment outcome
Implantatctr, Kneippgatan 4, SE-60236 Norrköping, Sweden.
Chonbuk Natl Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Radiol, Jeonju, South Korea.
Linköping Univ Hosp, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, S-58185 Linköping, Sweden.
Linköping Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, S-58185 Linköping, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2010 (English)In: International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, ISSN 0882-2786, E-ISSN 1942-4434, Vol. 25, no 2, p. 321-328Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between bone mineral density (BMD) before implant placement, implant stability measures at implant placement, and marginal bone loss of immediately loaded implants after 1 year in situ. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutively recruited patients received Straumann SLActive implants loaded with fixed provisional prostheses within 24 hours. BMD was measured from computed tomographic images before implant placement. Alveolar bone quality was assessed during surgery. Implant stability-both rotational and as measured with resonance frequency analysis-and marginal bone height were assessed at implant placement and after 1 year. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to calculate correlations, and significance was considered when P < .05. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients received 137 implants (87 in maxillae and 50 in mandibles). BMD was significantly correlated with bone quality classification in both arches (P < .001). Mean BMD was also significantly correlated with stability values (P < .001). Mean marginal bone loss at implant surfaces differed, but not significantly, at the 1-year follow-up, regardless of BMD values (P = .086) and measured stability (rotational stability P = .34, resonance frequency analysis P = .43) at implant placement. CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this study, it can be concluded that computed tomographic examination can be used as a preoperative method to assess jawbone density before implant placement, since density values correlate with prevailing methods of measuring implant stability. However, in the short time perspective of 1 year, there were no differences in survival rates or changes in marginal bone level between implants placed in bone tissue of different density.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 25, no 2, p. 321-328
National Category
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6141ISI: 000276975600012PubMedID: 20369091Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-77953271736Local ID: 11284OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6141DiVA, id: diva2:1403030
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-06-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

PubMedScopus

Authority records

Lindh, Christina

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindh, Christina
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 80 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf