and 2 other(s)
Primary and secondary (biological) stability, are considered reliable criteria for osseointegration evaluation. One of the less invasive methods is considered the Periotest values. However, the damping effect may be susceptible due to some variables like: level of positioning and the superstructure material. It is necessary to determine the difference of these values appreciated on healing and prosthetic abutments as well as temporary or permanent crowns. To appreciate the difference between the Periotest values in dependence of superstructures. Sixteen partially edentulous patients from which 4 men and 12 women mean age 41.3 (SE=1.55) years (SE-standard error) received 31 two-piece dental implants installed in the upper and lower jaws (anterior and posterior region). The implants diameter varied betwen 3,75 and 4,2mm while the lenght-between 10-13mm. Before the prosthetic treatment Periotest values were appreciated at each implant with healing abutment, prosthetic abutment, and fixed crown. In all cases, the measurements were made at the closest level of the mucosa. Statistical analysis was made by calculating mean values, standard errors and Students paired T-test. All implants were successfully integrated. Mean Periotest values were the following: healing abutment: -5.93 (SE=0.21), prosthetic abutment: -5.92 (SE=0.23), temporary crown: -5.42 (SE=0.19), permanent crown(metal/ceramic): -5.58 (SE=0.20). All measurements were performed in maximum two weeks at the same implant. The study demonstrate the efficiency of Periotest measurements almost in all of cases. There was insignificant difference between milled and standard temporary crowns. The study demonstrate the predictability of Periotest measurements values. There is no essential differences between superstructures values, but at the same time, showed necessity to study more thorough the results of milled and conventional temporary crowns.
No datasets are available for this submission.
No license information is available for this submission.