Assessment of Hard Tissue Density Around Dental Implants

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1, 35 - 41, 28.01.2021

Wael Alshaibani Nur Mollaoğlu

Öz

Introduction: The aim of this study to analyse the post surgical bone resorption around dental implants using two different radiographic techniques.

Material and Methods: In this study, there were total of 27 otherwise healthy patients attended and 54 dental implants were applied to these patients bilaterally. Group A consisted of 15 patients who underwent to conventional flap surgical technique, while 12 patients in group B underwent to mini-flap procedure. All the patients received GaAlAs diode laser to one side and the other side was kept as a control. Radiographs were taken directly after the implants were inserted, then 1st and 3rd month following the operation.

Results: There found to be there is no statistically significant difference in hard tissue density around dental implants between mini or conventional flep groups wether GaAIAs diode laser applied or not by using two different radiographic analysis.

Conclusions: This study revealed that both flap groups irradiated or non-irradiated have not displayed any significant differences in the mean of bone resorption according to the radiological assessment done by both periapical and panoramic radiographs. However, there was a slightly less bone resorption in the irradiated mini-flap group than the non-irradiated conventional flap group. Therefore, LLLT may be a promising treatment modality for accelerating bone healing around dental implants, when used in increased doses and treatment schedules.

Anahtar Kelimeler

GaAlAs laser, Flap, Implants, Radiography

Dental İmplantlar Çevresi Kemik Yoğunluğunun Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Giriş: Bu çalışmanın amacı, dental implantlar çevresindeki sert doku değişikliklerini iki farklı radyolojik görüntüleme tekniği kullanarak analiz etmektir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmaya herhangi bir sistemik rahatsızlığı olmayan ve sigara içmeyen toplam 27 hasta dahil edildi ve bilateral olarak 54 dental implant uygulandı. Grup A, geleneksel flep cerrahisi tekniği uygulanan 15 hastadan oluşurken, grup B’deki 12 hastaya mini flep prosedürü uygulandı. Bütün hastalarda GaAlAs diyot lazer unilateral olarak uygulanıp diğer taraf kontrol tarafı olarak kabul edildi. Radyografiler implantlar yerleştirildikten hemen sonra ve takiben operasyondan 1 ay ve 3 ay sonra çekildi.

Bulgular: Periapikal ve panoramik radyografileri alınarak yapılan analizler sonucunda, konvansiyonel veya mini flep grubunda implantların etrafındaki kemik rezorpsiyonunda, GaAlAs diode lazer uygulansın veya uygulanmasın istatistiksel olarak önemli bir fark olmadığı saptanmıştır.

Sonuç: Bu çalışma, her iki farklı periapikal ve panoramik radyografiler ile yapılan radyolojik değerlendirmeye göre, GaAlAs diyot lazer verilen veya verilmeyen her iki farklı flep grubunda kemik rezorpsiyonunda anlamlı bir farklılık saptanmadığını ortaya koymuştur. Bununla birlikte, lazer uygulanan mini flep grubunda anlamlı olmamakla birlikte daha az kemik rezorpsiyonu gözlenmiştir. Bu nedenle, LLLT daha yüksek doz ve sık sayıda seanslar şeklinde uygulandığında, implant çevresi kemik yapıda iyileşmeyi hızlandırmada umut verici bir tedavi yöntemi olabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

GaAlAs lazer, Flep, İmplant, Radyografi

Kaynakça

• 1. Cai H, Liang X, Sun DY, Chen JY. Long-term clinical performance of flapless implant surgery compared to the conventional approach with flap elevation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Clin Cases 2020;26:8:1087–103.
• 2. Llamas-Monteagudo O, Girbés-Ballester P, Viña-Almunia J, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Peñarrocha-Diago M. Clinical parameters of implants placed in healed sites using flapped and flapless techniques: A systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2017;22:e572–e81.
• 3. Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Flapless versus Conventional Flapped Dental Implant Surgery: A Meta-Analysis. PLOS One 2014;9:e100624.
• 4. Matys J, Świder K, Grzech-Leśniak K, Dominiak M, Romeo U. Photobiomodulation by a 635nm Diode Laser on Peri-Implant Bone: Primary and Secondary Stability and Bone Density Analysis-A Randomized Clinical Trial. Biomed Res Int 2019;2019:2785302.
• 5. Khadra M, Ronold HJ, Lyngstadaas SP, Ellingsen JE, Haanaes HR. Low-level laser therapy stimulates bone-implant interaction:an experimental study in rabbits. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:325–32.
• 6.Kim YD, Kim SS, Hwang DS, Kim SG, Kwon YH, Shin SH, et al. Effect of low level laser treatment after installation of dental titanium implant-immunohistochemical study of RANKL, RANK, OPG: An experimental study in rats. Lasers Surg Med 2007;39:441-50.
• 7. Wittwer G, Adeyemo WL, Schicho K, Figi M, Enislidis G. Navigated flapless transmucosal implant placement in the mandible: A pilot study in 20 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:801-7.
• 8. Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Abolvardi M, Akhlaghian M, Paknahad M. Comparison of Dental Panoramic Radiography and CBCT for Measuring Vertical Bone Height in Different Horizontal Locations of Posterior Mandibular Alveolar Process. J Dent 2018;19:83–91.
• 9. Becker W, Goldstein M, Beker BE, Sennerby L. Minimally invasive flapless implant surgery: A prospective multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7,S21-7.
• 10. Blanco J, Nunez V, Aracil J, Munoz F, Ramos I. Ridge alterations following immediate implant placement in the dog: flap versus flapless surgery. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35:640-8.
• 11. Fortin T, Bosson JL, Isidori M, Blanchet E. Effect of flapless surgery on pain experienced in implant placement using an imageguided system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:298-304.
• 12. Van de Velde T, Glor F, De Bruyn H. A model study on flapless implant placement by clinicians with a different experience level in implant surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:66-72.
• 13. You TM, Choi BH, Li J, Xuan F, Jeong SM, Jang SO. Morphogenesis of the peri-implant mucosa: a comparison between flap and flapless procedures in the canine mandible. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107:66-70.
• 14. Nagarajan A, Perumalsamy R, Thyagarajan R, Namasivayam A. Diagnostic Imaging for Dental Implant Therapy. J Clin Imaging Sci 2014;4:4.
• 15. Zechner W, Watzak G, Gahleitner A, Busenlechner D, Tepper G, Watzek G. Rotational panoramic versus intraoral rectangular radiographs for evaluation of peri-implant bone loss in the anterior atrophic mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:873-8.
• 16. Kullman L, Al Asfour A, Zetterqvist L, Andersson L. Comparison of radiographic bone height assessments in panoramic and intraoral radiographs of implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22:96-100.