Published in:
01-07-2015 | Original Article
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Narrow- versus mini-implants at crestal and subcrestal bone levels. Experimental study in beagle dogs at three months
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 6/2015
Login to get accessAbstract
Objective
The objective of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration and crestal bone loss (CBL) in two implant designs with different diameters (Mini Sky® and Narrow Sky®) implants, placed at different vertical levels at healed canine ridges.
Material and methods
The second, third, and fourth mandibular premolars of six Beagle dogs were extracted bilaterally. After 2 months healing, four implants divided into two groups according to their diameters (i.e., Narrow Sky® and Mini Sky®) were placed in each hemi-mandible at the level of the bone crest or 2 mm subcrestally. The animals were euthanized at 12 weeks and undecalcified samples were processed for histology. Histomorphometric analysis was carried out to compare bone-to-implant contacts (BIC) and crestal bone loss (CBL).
Results
There were not significant differences in CBL between groups when the implants were placed at subcrestal bone level (p > 0.05), meanwhile the CBL was significantly higher for both groups when the implants were inserted at crestal level (p < 0.05). All implants were osseointegrated presenting a minimum BIC percentage of 56 %. The major percentages of BIC were found for both groups at subcrestal level (p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Within the limitations of this experimental study may be concluded that the implant diameter does not affect the CBL. BIC values are affected by implant diameter and design been higher for narrow implants compared to mini-implants. Subcrestal insertion of both implants favors crestal bone preservation but crestal insertion of both designs is associated with crestal bone loss
Clinical relevance
The study shows that narrow implants protect peri-implant crestal bone.