Clinical and radiographic assessment of circular versus triangular cross‐section neck implants in the posterior maxilla: Five‐year follow‐up of a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Objectives Dental implants with a triangular neck design have been developed in order to maintain peri‐implant bone. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to assess after 5 years the peri‐implant bone stability and the peri‐implant soft tissue conditions with this new triangular implant neck design compared to a conventional round neck implant design. Material and Methods This is a secondary evaluation of a RCT including 34 patients. Patients were recalled after 1, 3, and finally 5 years to assess implant survival and peri‐implant bone levels using standardized radiographs. Peri‐implant soft tissue health was also evaluated by recording probing depth, plaque index and Bleeding on Probing. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and the Pink Esthetic Score were also assessed. Results No implant loss occurred during the 5‐year follow up period. The mean ± SD proximal bone remodeling after 5 years reached 0.38 ± 0.39 mm for the circular design and 0.29 ± 0.58 mm for the triangular design (p = .49). Peri‐implant soft tissue health parameters and PROMs were found to be comparable. Altogether, 80% of implants presented peri‐implant mucositis whereas one implant (4%) displayed sings of peri‐implantitis. Conclusion The 5‐year evaluation of the triangular neck implants showed similar results to the circular neck implants.

The effect of triangular cross‐section neck design on crestal bone stability in the anterior mandible: A retrospective study with a 5‐year follow‐up

“…Traditionally, criteria for successful implant therapy included a mean CBL of 2 mm in the first year after the implant insertion (Albrektsson et al, 1986) After 1 year of loading, the mean proximal CBL was 0.22 and 0.42 mm for TN and RN, respectively, although the difference did not reach significance. In another study with a 5-year follow-up by the same authors, similar results were reported when comparing the two neck designs in terms of proximal CBL, which was evaluated using periapical radiography (Hurtgen et al, 2023). In our previous study, which compared TN to RN in implants retaining mandibular overdenture in a split-mouth design, the mean proximal CBL was 0.58 and 0.91 mm in TN and RN, respectively, after 1 year of loading (Tokuc & Kan, 2021).…”