Resumen de Evaluation of Mandibular Posterior Single Implants With Two Different Surfaces: A 5-Year Comparative Study
Ui-Won Jung, Jung-Yoo Choi, Chang-Sung Kim, Kyoo-Sung Cho, Jung-Kiu Chai, Chong-Kwan Kim, Seong-Ho Choi
Background: Anatomic and biomechanical limitations can jeopardize successful single implantation in the mandibular posterior area. To overcome the limitations, the design and the surface of the fixtures were modified. This study evaluated the cumulative survival rate (CSR) of mandibular molars replaced with a sand-blasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) single implant or an anodized (ANO) single implant and examined associated factors, such as the surface treatment, position, and length and diameter of the implants.
Methods: One hundred ninety-three single implants restored with an SLA implant and 112 single implants restored with an ANO implant in the mandibular molar area were selected from subjects who had visited the Department of Periodontology, Dental Hospital of Yonsei University, from March 2001 through June 2006. In the SLA group, 123 and 70 implants were placed in the first and second molar area, respectively. In the ANO group, 55 and 57 implants were placed in the first and second molar area, respectively. The 1- to 6-year CSR of the SLA and ANO groups was calculated using the life-table analysis. In addition, associated factors, such as the surface treatment, position, and length and diameter of the implants, were compared and analyzed using the χ2 test (P <0.05).
Results: Two of 193 implants in the SLA group failed, giving a CSR of 98.96%; four of 112 ANO implants failed, giving a CSR of 96.43%. There were no significant differences with regard to the surface treatment, position, and length and diameter of the implants.
Conclusions: Despite the anatomic and biomechanical limitation in the mandibular posterior area, mandibular posterior single implants showed a high CSR during the observation period. Mandibular posterior single implants can be an effective and reliable treatment modality that is not affected by the surface treatment, position, or length and diameter of the implant.
