Bone platform switching involves an inward bone ring in the coronal part of the implant that is in continuity with the alveolar bone crest. Bone platform switching is obtained by using a dental fixture with a reverse conical neck. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of conventional vs reverse conical neck implants. In the period between May 2004 and November 2007, 86 patients (55 females and 31 males; median age, 53 years) were operated and 234 implants were inserted: 40 and 194 were conventional vs reverse conical neck implants, respectively. Kaplan-Meier algorithm and Cox regression were used to detect those variables associated with the clinical outcome. No differences in survival and success rates were detected between conventional vs reverse conical neck implants alone or in combination with any of the studied variables. Although bone platform switching leads to several advantages, no statistical difference in alveolar crest resorption is detected in comparison with reverse conical neck implants. We suppose that the proximity of the implant abutment junction to the alveolar crestal bone gives no protection against the microflora contained in the micrograph. Additional studies on larger series and a combination of platform switching and bone platform switching could lead to improved clinical outcomes.
Platform switching and bone platform switching
CARINCI, Francesco;BRUNELLI, Giorgio;
2009
Abstract
Bone platform switching involves an inward bone ring in the coronal part of the implant that is in continuity with the alveolar bone crest. Bone platform switching is obtained by using a dental fixture with a reverse conical neck. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of conventional vs reverse conical neck implants. In the period between May 2004 and November 2007, 86 patients (55 females and 31 males; median age, 53 years) were operated and 234 implants were inserted: 40 and 194 were conventional vs reverse conical neck implants, respectively. Kaplan-Meier algorithm and Cox regression were used to detect those variables associated with the clinical outcome. No differences in survival and success rates were detected between conventional vs reverse conical neck implants alone or in combination with any of the studied variables. Although bone platform switching leads to several advantages, no statistical difference in alveolar crest resorption is detected in comparison with reverse conical neck implants. We suppose that the proximity of the implant abutment junction to the alveolar crestal bone gives no protection against the microflora contained in the micrograph. Additional studies on larger series and a combination of platform switching and bone platform switching could lead to improved clinical outcomes.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
