The Effect of Triangular Neck Design on Crestal Bone Loss

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

The objective of this retrospective study with 5-year follow-up was to compare crestal bone loss (CBL) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) around triangular cross-section neck (TN) to round neck (RN) implants retaining mandibular overdentures, using cone-beam computed tomography

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Dental Implant Failed
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Dental implant

Detailed Description

CBL is a multifactorial entity including factors related to patients, surgical technique, prosthetic interventions, and implant design. Thus, new developments in implant micro- and macro-features, such as modifications of surface characteristics and chemistry, type of abutment connection, thread design, and neck design have been introduced over time parallel to recent advances in implantology not only for reducing CBL, but also for preserving buccal bone dimensions around implant. Furthermore, implant neck properties have been considered as a determinant factor involved in maintenance of crestal bone around implant in various trials. Nevertheless, there is no consensus with respect to the design of implant neck for reducing CBL.

The most common implant neck design is the circular one; recently, however, a newly designed implant with a triangular neck (TN) portion was introduced, which has reduction in the neck portion on three sides. This neck design provides compression-free area to alveolar crest during implant insertion to minimize CBL. In addition, TN design also would enhance the BBT by increasing the space between the flat part of the triangle and the buccal bone cortex. Based our previous study with one-year follow-up, despite the implants with novel neck design showed a better crestal bone preservation compared to conventional neck design, long-term clinical trials determining the effect of TN are missing for validating the success of this new design. Unfortunately, the data derived from only very few short-term comparative clinical trials to date do not provide an answer on benefits of TN design over the CN implants regarding preserving crestal bone level.

Thus, this retrospective study with up-to-x-month follow-up aimed to compare CBL and BBT around implants with TN and RN retaining mandibular overdentures. The null hypothesis was that there was a difference in CBL and BBT between two implant designs in the long-term follow-up.

• Study Type: Observational
• Enrollment (Actual): 17

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Turkey
  • Kocaeli, Turkey
    • Kocaeli University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 59 years to 72 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

• Sampling Method: Probability Sample

Study Population

Healty patients who was inserted dental implants with two different designs

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients over 18 years old.
• Mandibular total edentulism.
• Presence of sufficient residual bone width (>5 mm) and length (>10 mm).
• Sufficient keratinized gingiva crestally (≥4 mm).
• Sufficient interarch space.
• Sufficient vestibular depth.
• Patients had their teeth extracted at least three months before surgery.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients with any systemic disease or condition that can/could compromise osteointegration (cancer, diabetes mellitus, osteopo- rosis, and cardiovascular diseases).
• Presence of any drug use that could affect bone metabolism.
• Presence of immunocompromising conditions.
• Presence of any pathology in the mandible.
• Allergy to any drugs used in the postoperative period.
• Patients who are smokers.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Number of groups / cohorts

2

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort	Intervention / Treatment
triangular cross-section neck implant	Other: Dental implant; Dental implants with triangular cross-section neck design
round cross-section neck implant	Other: Dental implant; Dental implants with triangular cross-section neck design

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Time Frame
comparison of crestal bone loss	February 2023
comparison of buccal bone thickness	February 2023

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Kocaeli University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): September 22, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): February 1, 2023
• Study Completion (Actual): February 1, 2023

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: February 12, 2023
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 12, 2023
• First Posted (Estimate): February 22, 2023

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimate): February 22, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 12, 2023
• Last Verified: February 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: peri-implant soft tissue; crestal bone loss; : buccal bone thickness; neck design; triangular cross-section neck
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2022/158

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No