Evaluation of Immediate Loading Mini-implant versus Traditional Implant (Clinical and Radiographic Study)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Oral and Maxillofacial surgery department, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University

2 Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery College of Dentistry University of Science and Technology of Fujairah

3 Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University

Abstract

Introduction: Replacing lost teeth by employing dental implants has represented  a challenge since ancient times. Using mini-implants is more favorable than conventional ones, not only for surgeons but also for patients. Aim: The current study aimed to compare the conventional and mini dental implants regarding primary stability, vertical bone loss after three- and nine-month post-surgery, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth in three- and nine-month.
Materials and Methods: The current study used two types of dental implants, conventional dental implants (Dentium super line) and mini dental implants (Dentium slim line). Accordingly, two examination groups were defined, Group I and Group II. Each group included eight dental implants in healthy patients aged 31-48. All implants were subjected to clinical and radiographic examinations either before surgery or after surgery. Both conventional and mini-implants were checked based on primary stability, vertical bone loss after three- and nine- months post-surgery, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth in three- and nine- months.
Results: The results showed no significant differences between the conventional and mini dental implants regarding the primary stability and vertical bone loss in three- and nine months. Also, clinically there is no significant difference in plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth.
Conclusion: The mini-implant can be a promising alternative when the ridge width does not accommodate the conventional type.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics