Comparative Evaluation of Implants with Different Surface Treatments Placed in Human Edentulous Mandibles: A 1-Year Prospective Study

Abstract

The aims of this study were to analyze prospectively and comparatively the peri-implant bone crest levels, bone density, stability and success rate of implants with different surface treatments in human edentulous mandibles. Twenty edentulous patients were selected. Four different implants were placed between the mental foramen. Four groups were evaluated: (1) laser-modified surface (LASER), (2) surface modified by laser with deposition of apatites (LASER + HA), (3) surface modified by double acid etching (ACID, Implacil De Bortoli) and (4) surface modified by sandblasting and acid etching (SLActive®, Straumann). Clinical, radiographic, resonance frequency and tomographic analyses were used. After 4 months, mandibular fixed implant prostheses were installed. Clinical and radiographic analyses were performed at times T0 (immediately after implant placement), T1 (15 days), T2 (30 days), T3 (60 days), T4 (90 days), T5 (120 days), T6 (180 days) and T7 (360 days), post-implant placement. The resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was measured at T0, T4, T6 and T7. The tomographic analysis was performed at T0, T4 and T7. In the radiographic bone density analysis, a statistical difference was found between the SLActive® and LASER + HA groups at T4 (p < 0.05). Statistical differences were observed in RFA at T4 (90 days), between the SLActive® and LASER groups (p < 0.05) and between the SLActive® and LASER + HA groups (p < 0.05). At T6 and T7, statistical differences were found between the SLActive® group and all other implant surfaces (p < 0.01). The experimental surfaces analyzed showed encouraging positive outcomes compared to those of the SLActive® surface. Long-term follow-up should be performed to confirm these results.

Keywords: Dental implants; Imaging; Lasers; Resonance frequency analysis; Surface.

Fig. 1

Study flowchart depicting the workflow of the placed implants

Fig. 2

Digital periapical radiographic bone density analysis. Quantification of the radiographic findings obtained at T0–T7 after implant placement for the 4 evaluated implant surfaces (*p < 0.05)

Fig. 3

Resonance frequency analysis. Quantification of the RFA findings obtained at T0, T4, T6 and T7 after implant placement for the 4 evaluated implant surfaces (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001)

Fig. 4

Linear digital periapical radiographic bone loss analysis. Quantification of the radiographic findings obtained at T0–T7 after implant placement for the 4 evaluated implant surfaces

Fig. 5

Mesio-distal (top) and bucco-lingual (bottom) tomography density analysis. Quantification of the tomographic findings obtained at T0, T4, T6 and T7 after implant placement for the 4 evaluated implant surfaces

Fig. 6

Linear tomographic bone loss analysis. Quantification of the tomographic findings obtained at T0, T4, T6 and T7 after implant placement for the 4 evaluated implant surfaces