Influence of the Crown-Implant Connection on the Preservation of Peri-Implant Bone: A Retrospective Multifactorial Analysis

Abstract

This assignment applies to all translations of the Work as well as to preliminary display/posting of the abstract of the accepted article in electronic form before publication. If any changes in authorship (order, deletions, or additions) occur after the manuscript is submitted, agreement by all authors for such changes must be on file with the Publisher. An author's name may be removed only at his/her written request. (Note: Material prepared by employees of the US government in the course of their official duties cannot be copyrighted.

Intra‐ and inter‐examiner agreement when assessing radiographic implant bone levels: Differences related to brightness, accuracy, participant demographics and implant characteristics

“…The results also bring into question the conclusions from an in- year around internal connection implants (Galindo-Moreno et al, 2015). In another study, it was reported that after 33 months, compared to matched diameter abutments, a platform diameter switch of 0.5 mm resulted in a 0.5 mm more coronal MBL and a platform radius switch of 1.7 mm resulted in a 0.93 mm more coronal MBL (Canullo et al, 2010).…”

“…Conclusions that certain loading protocols are superior, specific implant brands have reduced MBL changes, or that different abutment materials are more biocompatible judged by MBLs, should be viewed with caution. One study reported a marginal bone loss of 0.714 mm/year around externally connected implants, which was statistically significantly greater than the marginal bone loss of 0.516 mm/year around internal connection implants (Galindo‐Moreno et al, ). In another study, it was reported that after 33 months, compared to matched diameter abutments, a platform diameter switch of 0.5 mm resulted in a 0.5 mm more coronal MBL and a platform radius switch of 1.7 mm resulted in a 0.93 mm more coronal MBL (Canullo et al, ).…”

“…Many articles state average changes in MBLs, or marginal bone changes associated with implants to the hundredth or even a thousandth of a millimeter. Researchers use these measurements to compare different therapeutic modalities such as external versus internal connections (Galindo-Moreno, et al, 2015) and platform switching versus platform matched abutments (Canullo, Fedele, Iannello, & Jepsen, 2010). Companies use these results to promote the superiority of their products over those of rivals.…”

The influence of the distance between narrow implants and the adjacent teeth on marginal bone levels

“…, ) and connection design (Galindo‐Moreno et al. ). A summary of this evidence shows that narrow‐diameter implants that are placed below the crestal bone in patients who smoke, with under‐preparation of the implant bed and restored with individually cemented crowns soon after they are placed, are more likely to lose more marginal bone in the early stages.…”

Immediate loading over lower prosthesis in edentulous mandibles: comparison between two types of prosthetic connection

“…Galindo-Moreno et al 21 also found significantly higher marginal bone loss in implants with external connection (0.714 mm/year) as compared to implants with internal connection (0.516 mm/ year) installed in the mandible after 6 and 18 months. However, as in the present study, other authors found no statistical difference in bone loss around implants with internal and external connections 6,9 .…”