Journal of Dental Implants
   About JDI | Editorial | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Login 
Users Online: 77  Wide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 36-43

Randomize clinical trial of the effect of machined and rough surface of implant collar on crestal bone level and surrounding soft tissue


1 Department of Prosthontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India
2 Department of Oral Medicine and Radology, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Anshul Chugh
Department of Prosthontics, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jdi.jdi_26_20

Rights and Permissions

Statement of Problem: The importance of implant collar/neck in crestal bone area triggered the need to understand the influence of its design/surface topography on surrounding hard and soft tissues. Purpose: This study analyzed the effect of machined and rough surface of implant collar on bone level at crestal region and surrounding soft tissues in maxillary and mandibular anterior region. Materials and Methods: The clinical study was conducted on 20 participants (15 males and 5 females) based on the inclusion and exclusion parameters. Participants were broadly divided into two groups with 10 dental implants in Group R (implant with rough collar design) and Group M (implant with machined collar design). The participants were evaluated at baseline (within 1 week after implant placement), 3 months, and 6 months for crestal bone level and soft tissue parameters (pink esthetic score [PES]). Results: All implants showed clinically acceptable bone loss at interval of 6 months, i.e., 0.68 and 0.74 on mesial and distal aspect of R group implants, respectively, and 1.15 and 0.83 at mesial and distal aspect of R group implants, respectively. And also, the PES of all implants observed was above the clinical acceptability level, i.e., 6.15 and 6.05 for R and M groups implants, respectively. Conclusion: It can be concluded from the present study that there is no significant difference statistically in bone level at crestal region and soft tissues parameters in two different implant collar designs used in the study although the loss of bone observed was higher in machined group in comparison to rough group of implants and the PES observed was also more in R group in comparison to M group.


[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
    Viewed11511    
    Printed6    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded66    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal