{"title":"早期加载与延迟加载种植体周围组织的比较评估","authors":"Mutthineni Ramesh Babu, Arpita Paul, Srija Dadipally","doi":"10.21474/ijar01/19032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims and Objectives: This study compared and evaluated the peri-implant tissue alterations in single-piece implants that were loaded early versus delayed. To evaluate the differences in radiographic results and clinical characteristics between early and delayed loaded implants. Materials and Methods: Using radio visio graphs (RVGs), the current study aims to assess and compare the clinical and radiographic results of early loaded implants versus delayed loaded implants. Twenty sites in all, based on the kind of implant loading techniques, were randomly divided into two groups by flipping a coin, following the first screening and the patients who met the inclusion requirements. Ten sites with an early loading technique (GROUP 1) and ten sites with a delayed loading methodology (GROUP 2) were separated into two groups. In both groups, the Bioline single-piece implants were utilised. Results: The clinical parameters probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, and width of the keratinized peri-implant mucosa were measured at baseline, 3 & 6 months. Changes in marginal bone loss were measured using RVG. To evaluate the alterations in marginal bone level, AUTO CAD was utilised. SPSS V.23 was employed for the purpose of data analysis. Using the Mann Whitney U test for intergroup comparison and Friedmans Two-way ANOVA for intragroup comparison, groups 1 and 2 were assessed on mesial and distal surfaces. Conclusion: Given the current studys constraints, the findings can be summed up as follows: early loaded implants performed better than delayed loaded implants in all clinical and radiographic measures from baseline to six months.","PeriodicalId":13781,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Advanced Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PERI-IMPLANT TISSUES AROUND EARLY LOADED VERSUS DELAYED LOADEDIMPLANTS\",\"authors\":\"Mutthineni Ramesh Babu, Arpita Paul, Srija Dadipally\",\"doi\":\"10.21474/ijar01/19032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aims and Objectives: This study compared and evaluated the peri-implant tissue alterations in single-piece implants that were loaded early versus delayed. To evaluate the differences in radiographic results and clinical characteristics between early and delayed loaded implants. Materials and Methods: Using radio visio graphs (RVGs), the current study aims to assess and compare the clinical and radiographic results of early loaded implants versus delayed loaded implants. Twenty sites in all, based on the kind of implant loading techniques, were randomly divided into two groups by flipping a coin, following the first screening and the patients who met the inclusion requirements. Ten sites with an early loading technique (GROUP 1) and ten sites with a delayed loading methodology (GROUP 2) were separated into two groups. In both groups, the Bioline single-piece implants were utilised. Results: The clinical parameters probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, and width of the keratinized peri-implant mucosa were measured at baseline, 3 & 6 months. Changes in marginal bone loss were measured using RVG. To evaluate the alterations in marginal bone level, AUTO CAD was utilised. SPSS V.23 was employed for the purpose of data analysis. Using the Mann Whitney U test for intergroup comparison and Friedmans Two-way ANOVA for intragroup comparison, groups 1 and 2 were assessed on mesial and distal surfaces. Conclusion: Given the current studys constraints, the findings can be summed up as follows: early loaded implants performed better than delayed loaded implants in all clinical and radiographic measures from baseline to six months.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Advanced Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Advanced Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/19032\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Advanced Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/19032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的和目标:本研究比较并评估了单片种植体早期加载和延迟加载时种植体周围组织的改变。评估早期和延迟植入种植体在放射学结果和临床特征方面的差异。材料和方法:本研究使用无线电可见图(RVGs),旨在评估和比较早期加载种植体与延迟加载种植体的临床和放射学结果。根据种植体加载技术的种类,在对符合纳入要求的患者进行首次筛选后,通过掷硬币的方式将患者随机分为两组。其中,10 个部位采用早期植入技术(第 1 组),10 个部位采用延迟植入技术(第 2 组)。两组均使用 Bioline 单件式种植体。结果分别在基线、3 个月和 6 个月时测量探查袋深度、临床附着水平和种植体周围角化粘膜宽度等临床参数。使用 RVG 测量边缘骨质流失的变化。为了评估边缘骨水平的变化,使用了 AUTO CAD。数据分析采用 SPSS V.23。使用 Mann Whitney U 检验进行组间比较,使用 Friedmans 双向方差分析进行组内比较,对第一组和第二组的中面和远面进行评估。结论:鉴于目前研究的局限性,研究结果可以总结如下:从基线到六个月期间,在所有临床和放射学指标上,早期加载的种植体都优于延迟加载的种植体。
COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PERI-IMPLANT TISSUES AROUND EARLY LOADED VERSUS DELAYED LOADEDIMPLANTS
Aims and Objectives: This study compared and evaluated the peri-implant tissue alterations in single-piece implants that were loaded early versus delayed. To evaluate the differences in radiographic results and clinical characteristics between early and delayed loaded implants. Materials and Methods: Using radio visio graphs (RVGs), the current study aims to assess and compare the clinical and radiographic results of early loaded implants versus delayed loaded implants. Twenty sites in all, based on the kind of implant loading techniques, were randomly divided into two groups by flipping a coin, following the first screening and the patients who met the inclusion requirements. Ten sites with an early loading technique (GROUP 1) and ten sites with a delayed loading methodology (GROUP 2) were separated into two groups. In both groups, the Bioline single-piece implants were utilised. Results: The clinical parameters probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, and width of the keratinized peri-implant mucosa were measured at baseline, 3 & 6 months. Changes in marginal bone loss were measured using RVG. To evaluate the alterations in marginal bone level, AUTO CAD was utilised. SPSS V.23 was employed for the purpose of data analysis. Using the Mann Whitney U test for intergroup comparison and Friedmans Two-way ANOVA for intragroup comparison, groups 1 and 2 were assessed on mesial and distal surfaces. Conclusion: Given the current studys constraints, the findings can be summed up as follows: early loaded implants performed better than delayed loaded implants in all clinical and radiographic measures from baseline to six months.