Journals / 7tepe Klinik / 2019 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of the effect of laser microfrictioning on the marjinal bone resorption

Lazer ile dental implant yüzeyi pürüzlendirme yönteminin marjinal kemik kaybına etkisinin değerlendirilmesi

Pages
188–192
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, longer clinical follows and more subjects are required to evaluate the effectiveness of laser microfrictioning technique.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: The aim of this research is to evaluate the effect of laser microfriction on the alveolar resorbtion.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: In this retrospective study, standart surfaced (TRX, RBT) and laser microfrictioned (TLX, Laser-Lok) 171 dental implants of 87 patients were evaluated due to alveolar bone resorbtion by using opstoperative 1. day, 3. month and 3.year panaromic xrays.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, longer clinical follows and more subjects are required to evaluate the effectiveness of laser microfrictioning technique.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this research is to evaluate the effect of laser microfriction on the alveolar resorbtion. Material and Methods: In this retrospective study, standart surfaced (TRX, RBT) and laser microfrictioned (TLX, Laser-Lok) 171 dental implants of 87 patients were evaluated due to alveolar bone resorbtion by using opstoperative 1. day, 3. month and 3.year panaromic xrays. Measurements performed by using a computer software at the mesial and distal sides of dental dimplants were analysed statistically. Results: It was revealed that there is no statistically meaningful difference between the TRX and TLX groups due to alveolar bone resorbtion. Conclusion: Laser microfriction technique is used to reduce alveolar bone resorbtion. Although, there are some studies in the literature which are asserting that laser microfriction method is a useful technique to reduce alveolar bone resorbtion, in this study it was cleared that there is no statistical difference between laser microfrictioned and standart surfaces. As a result, longer clinical follows and more subjects are required to evaluate the effectiveness of laser microfrictioning technique.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı lazer ile implant boyun yüzeyi pürüzlendirme işleminin marjinal alveol kemiği kaybına etkisini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu retrospektif çalışmada, toplam 171 standart yüzeyli (TRX, RBT) ve laserle pürüzlendirilmiş (TLX, LASER-Lok) implant uygulanmış 87 hastadan alınan postop 1. gün, 3. ay ve 3. yıl panaromik radyografiler incelenerek marjinal alveol kemiği kaybı ile ilgili değerlendirmeler yapıldı. İmplantların mesial ve distal yüzeylerinden bir bilgisayar yazılımı kullanılarak yapılan ölçümlerin ortalama değerli istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Yapılan istatistiksel analizler sonucunda TRX (kontrol grubu) ile TLX (deney grubu) arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı. Sonuç: Lazerle implant boyun yüzeyini pürüzlendirme yöntemi marjinal alveolar kemik rezorbsiyonunu önlemek için kullanılan bir yöntemdir. Literatürde bu yöntemin etkinliği ile ilgili olumlu çalışmalar bulunmasına rağmen bu çalışmada yöntemin etkinliğiyle ilgili anlamlı bir veri elde edilememiştir. Bu nedenle yöntemin etkinliğinin daha ayrıntılı ve daha uzun süreli takip çalışmaları ile değerlendirilmesi gereklidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

CANSIZ, E., YALÇIN, B. K. (2019). Evaluation of the effect of laser microfrictioning on the marjinal bone resorption. 7tepe Klinik, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 2, 188–192. https://ajindex.com/articles/145281

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Albrektsson T. On long-term maintenance of the osseointegrated response. Australian Prosthodontic Journal 1993; 7: 15–24
  2. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL. Implant success, survival, and failure: the InternationalCongress of Oral Implantologistsc (ICOI) Pisa consensus conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17(1): 5–15
  3. Esposito M, Hiersch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci 1998; 106: 527–551
  4. Kitamura E, Stegaroui R, Nomura S, Miyakawa O. Biomechanical aspects of marginal bone resorption around osseointegrated implants: considerations based on a three dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15: 401-412
  5. Arvidson K, Bystedt H, Frykholm A, von Konow L, Lothigius E. Five year prospective follow-up report of the Astra Tech Dental Implant System in the treatment of edentulous mandibles. Clin Oral Implants Res 1998; 9(4): 225- 234
  6. Astrand P, Engquist B, Dahlgren S, Kertsin E, Feldmann H. Astra Tech and Branemark system implants: a 5- year prospective study of marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 413-420
  7. Adell R, Lecholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI, Lindhe J, et al. Marginal tissue reaction at osseointegrated titanium fixtures. A 3 year longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1986; 15: 39-521
  8. Appleton RS, Nummikoski PV, Pigno MA, Cronin RJ, Chung KH. A radiographic assesment of progressive loading on bone around single osseointegrated implants in the posterior maxilla. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16: 161-167
  9. Bahat, O. Branemark system implants in the posterior jaw: clinical study of 660 implants followed for 5 to 12 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15: 646-653
  10. Iorio-Siciliano V, Marenzi G, Blasi A. Influence of platform-switched, laser-microtextured implant on marginal bone level: a 24-Month Case Series Study. Int J Oral Max Impl 2016; 31(1): 162– 166
  11. Saul W, Joshua S, David E, Barry Z, John R. The Effects of Laser Microtextured Collars Upon Crestal Bone Levels of Dental Implants. Implant Dent 2008; 17(2): 217-228
  12. Ericsson I et al. Different types of inflammatory reactions in peri-implant soft tissues. J Clin Periodontol 1995; 22(3): 255–261
  13. Geckili O, Mumcu E, Bilhan HA. Radiographic evaluation of narrow diameter implants after 5 years of clinical function: retrospective study. J Oral Implantol 2011; Article in press
  14. Tsutsumi T,