Our group reported that three diabetic retinopathy (DR) phenotypes: A, characterized by low microaneurysm turnover (MAT < 6) and normal central retinal thickness (CRT); B, low MAT (<6) and increased CRT, and C, high MAT (≥6), present different risks for development of macular edema (DME) and proliferative retinopathy (PDR). To test these findings, 212 persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and mild nonproliferative retinopathy (NPDR), one eye per person, were followed for five years with annual visits. Of these, 172 completed the follow-up or developed an outcome: PDR or DME (considering both clinically significant macular edema (CSME) and center-involved macular edema (CIME)). Twenty-seven eyes (16%) developed either CSME (14), CIME (10), or PDR (4), with one eye developing both CSME and PDR. Phenotype A showed no association with development of vision-threatening complications. Seven eyes with phenotype B and three with phenotype C developed CIME. Phenotype C showed higher risk for CSME development, with 17.41 odds ratio (p = 0.010), compared with phenotypes A + B. All eyes that developed PDR were classified as phenotype C. Levels of HbA1c and triglycerides were increased in phenotype C (p < 0.001 and p = 0.018, respectively). In conclusion, phenotype C identifies eyes at higher risk for development of CSME and PDR, whereas phenotype A identifies eyes at very low risk for vision-threatening complications.
This study evaluated the biocompatibility of a new silicone-based sealer (GuttaFlow Bioseal) in rat subcutaneous tissue and compared the results with those for GuttaFlow2 and AH Plus. Each of 16 Wistar rats received four subcutaneous tissue implants, namely, GuttaFlow Bioseal, GuttaFlow2, AH Plus, and one empty polyethylene tube. Eight rats were euthanized at day 8 and the remaining eight at day 30. Histological sections were stained with haematoxylin and eosin and analysed with a light microscope. Scores were established for inflammatory reaction, macrophage infiltrate, thickness of the fibrous capsule, and vascular changes. Differences between groups were assessed by using the Friedman test with Bonferroni correction. Histological analysis showed that GuttaFlow Bioseal had the lowest inflammatory reaction of all tested sealers at day 8. At day 30, the silicone-based sealers had similar inflammation profiles, but inflammation scores were nonsignificantly higher for AH Plus than for the negative control. The inflammatory reaction decreased from day 8 to day 30 in all sealers. GuttaFlow Bioseal had the most macrophage infiltrate. Under the present experimental conditions, GuttaFlow Bioseal induced limited inflammatory reactions at days 8 and 30, and initial inflammatory reactions to GuttaFlow2 and AH Plus subsided within 30 days. All tested sealers exhibited satisfactory biocompatibility at day 30 after subcutaneous implantation.
Aim The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of dental implants with different neck characteristics. Methods A protocol‐oriented search aimed at the question: “In patients subjected to tooth replacement with screw‐type dental implants does the modification of the implant neck macro‐ or microgeometry contribute to the improvement of survival rates and maintenance of the peri‐implant marginal bone levels?” Primary outcomes were survival and marginal bone level (MBL) changes evaluated on randomized controlled trials with >10 participants and follow‐up >1 year. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The review follows the PRISMA statement. Results Forty‐three studies compared: (a) One‐ versus two‐piece implants (N = 7); (b) Two‐piece implants with different neck characteristics (machined and rough collars, microthreads, LASER microtexturing) (N = 21); (c) Two‐piece implants with macrogeometry modifications (tapering, back‐tapering, and scalloping) (N = 6). One‐ and two‐piece implants showed similar survival (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: [0.12, 1.66], p = 0.23) and MBL changes (WMD = 0.09 mm, 95% CI: [−0.27, 0.45], p = 0.64) at 1‐year post‐loading. Machined collar implants have higher risk of early failure than rough collar implants (RR = 3.96, 95% CI: [1.12, 13.93], p = 0.03) and 0.43 mm higher bone resorption (95% CI: [0.0, 0.86], p = 0.05). Microthreads (WMD = 0.07 mm, 95% CI: [−0.01, 0.15], p = 0.10) and LASER microtexturing (WMD = 0.15 mm, 95% CI: [−0.35, 0.65], p = 0.56) do not reduce bone resorption. Scalloped implants have 1.26 mm higher resorption (95% CI: [0.72, 2.00], p < 0.001). Conclusions One‐ and two‐piece implants have similar survival and MBL changes. Rough collar implants have lower MBL changes than machined collar implants. Additional modifications to rough collars are irrelevant.
ObjectiveEvaluation of differences in the clinical performance and crestal bone levels between implants restored with single crowns with platform‐matched or platform‐switched abutments after 3 years.Material and MethodsThe study enrolled adult patients missing two or more adjacent teeth in the posterior mandible with natural teeth mesial to the implant site. Randomization followed open‐flap implant insertion and the corresponding matching or switching healing abutments placed at surgery. Conventional loading was made with cemented crowns. Clinical follow‐up took place annually after loading up to 3 years. Bone level changes were measured in standardized radiographs as the variation in crestal bone from one evaluation to the next.ResultsSixty‐three patients with a total of 135 implants (66 platform matching, 69 platform switching) were analysed. From surgery to 36 months, mean bone loss was 0.28 ± 0.56 mm for the platform‐switching group and 0.68 ± 0.64 mm for the platform‐matching group. A statistically significant difference was found between groups (p = 0.002) with an estimate of 0.39 mm (0.15–0.64, 95% CI) in favour of platform switching.ConclusionsAfter 3 years, platform‐switching restorations showed a significant effect in the preservation of marginal bone levels compared to platform‐matching restorations.
BackgroundReliable implant-supported rehabilitation of an alveolar ridge needs sufficient volume of bone. In order to achieve a prosthetic-driven positioning, bone graft techniques may be required.PurposeThis prospective cohort study aims to clinically evaluate the amount of resorption of corticocancellous fresh-frozen allografts bone blocks used in the reconstruction of the severe atrophic maxilla.Materials and MethodsTwenty-two partial and totally edentulous patients underwent bone augmentation procedures with fresh-frozen allogenous blocks from the iliac crest under local anesthesia. Implants were inserted into the grafted sites after a healing period of 5 months. Final fixed prosthesis was delivered ± 4 months later. Ridge width analysis and measurements were performed with a caliper before and after grafting and at implant insertion. Bone biopsies were performed in 16 patients.ResultsA total of 98 onlay block allografts were used in 22 patients with an initial mean alveolar ridge width of 3.41 ± 1.36 mm. Early exposure of blocks was observed in four situations and one of these completely resorbed. Mean horizontal bone gain was 3.63 ± 1.28 mm (p < .01). Mean buccal bone resorption between allograph placement and the reopening stage was 0.49 ± 0.54 mm, meaning approximately 7.1% (95% confidence interval: [5.6%, 8.6%]) of total ridge width loss during the integration period. One hundred thirty dental implants were placed with good primary stability (≥ 30 Ncm). Four implants presented early failure before the prosthetic delivery (96.7% implant survival). All patients were successfully rehabilitated. Histomorphometric analysis revealed 20.9 ± 5.8% of vital bone in close contact to the remaining grafted bone. A positive strong correlation (adjusted R2 = 0.44, p = .003) was found between healing time and vital bone percentage.ConclusionsAugmentation procedures performed using fresh-frozen allografts from the iliac crest are a suitable alternative in the reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla with low resorption rate at 5 months, allowing proper stability of dental implants followed by fixed prosthetic rehabilitation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.