Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

322292.platform switch -_to_be_or_not_to_be_ver_5.1

platform switching in implant

  • Login to see the comments

322292.platform switch -_to_be_or_not_to_be_ver_5.1

  1. 1. Platform switch – to be or not to be? Andrija Petar Bošnjak School of Dental Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia Andrej Meniga Private practice, Zagreb, Croatia Ann Wennerberg, Victoria Fröjd School of Dentistry, Göteborg, Sweden
  2. 2. Background Bone resorption to the first thread during initial loading Biologic width around implants (Berglundh & Lindhe 1996) No resorption when an abutment with a narrower diamater is connected to the implant (Gardner 2005) – so called platform-switching
  3. 3. Objective Evaluation of the difference in histological findings between a platform-switching implant-to- abutment interface using a tight seal and a flat-to- flat interface Differences in ISQ values during 3 months for implants with transmucosal healing (one-stage procedure)
  4. 4. Material and methods 26 consecutive patients treated with 43 Ospol study implants 4.0 diameter, implant length of 10, 12 and 15 mm supporting single crowns or fixed partial dentures 36 implants (83.7%) – single tooth replacements in lateral parts of mandible (58.8%) and maxilla (41.2%)
  5. 5. Material and methods Paired implants  One with a healing abutment – creating flat-to-flat interface  One with a standard abutment – creating platform switch interface
  6. 6. Material and methods 2×2 mm biopsy of soft tissue was acquired 3 months after implant placement for histological evaluation (at the time of crown/fixed partial denture fixation) Immersed in sodium-cacodylate solution and subsequently analyzed
  7. 7. Material and methods Radiographic assessment of marginal bone level At the time of implant placement At 3 months recall (time of crown fixation) All patients were recalled monthly during osseointegration process ISQ measurements at the time of surgery and 3 months postoperatively
  8. 8. Results Cross-sections of fixated samples Inflammatory cell inflitrate Thickness of the epithelium Thickness of the connective tissue
  9. 9. Platform switch No substantial number of inflammatory cells Epithelial thickness Well-defined “rete pegs” Connective tissue layer
  10. 10. Flat-to-flat No substantial inflammatory cell infiltrate Epithelial thickness Connective tissue layer
  11. 11. ISQ measurements Platform-switch (± SD) Flat-to-flat (± SD) p At implant placement 72.5 ± 6.3 71.8 ± 5.9 NS At 1 month 77.3 ± 4.2 77.1 ± 3.8 NS At 3 months 81.8 ± 5.5 80 ± 4.7 NS
  12. 12. Conclusion Histologic analysis is in the early stage, but there is no significant inflammatory cell infiltrate Platform-switch seems to be as reliable for one- stage procedures as flat-to-flat interface ISQ measurements confirm that the stability was maintained during initial three months of healing
  13. 13. Further developments
  14. 14. Further developments
  15. 15. Further developments
  16. 16. Acknowledgments Ospol, Malmö, Sweden Göran Urde & Hans Berglund @ Ospol, Malmö, Sweden Petra Hammarström Johansson @ Dept Biomaterials/Handicap Research, Göteborg, Sweden Martina Vlah, Gordana Sporis & Lana Vodopija @ Meniga & Bosnjak LLC, Zagreb, Croatia Kresimir Sankovic, School of Pharmacy, Zagreb, Croatia Drazen Jovicevic, Dental Laboratory, Zagreb, Croatia