6533b856fe1ef96bd12b2851

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Updated secondary implant stability data of two dental implant systems. A retrospective cohort study

subject

description

Background At present, updated secondary implant stability data generated by actual versions of resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and mobility measurement (MM) electronic devices of 2 different implant systems with actual manufactured surfaces seem to lack and/or are incomplete. Material and Methods Secondary implant stability data based on both RFA and MM measurements were collected and analyzed from 44 formerly treated patients (24 f, 20 m) that received either Ankylos Cellplus (Ø3.5mm) (A) (n=36) or Straumann regular neck SLA tissue level (Ø4.1mm) (S) (n=37) implants in posterior positions of both jawbones (total number= 72). These results were interpretated in view of formerly published data. Results Estimated RFA outcomes (mean±SD) for A implants were of 81.23 (±0.65) (LP) - 76.15 (±1.57) (UP) isq; for S implants 76.15 (±1.48) (LP) - 73.88 (±2.34) (UP) isq. Estimated MM outcomes for A implants were (-4.0) (±0.23) (LP) - (-3.2) (±0.33) (UP) ptv; for S implants (-5.15) (±0.39) (LP) - (-4.4) (±0.84) (UP) ptv. According to GEE statistical modelling, implant type and – position seems to influence the outcome variables (p0.05). Conclusions Secondary implant stability values, recorded with current RFA and MM devices, of A Cellplus implants are provided for the first time. A difference of 14.7-9.7 isq values was noted for CellPlus versus TPS S implants recorded with a cabled RFA device. This study supports the assumption that RFA outcomes generated with first generation RFA devices are different from those obtained with current RFA devices, meaning that its use in reviews need caution and correction. Key words:Secondary implant stability, resonance frequency analysis, Periotest, Osstell Mentor, Straumann, Ankylos, CellPlus, SLA.