The early loading of different surface-modified implants
Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...Now open: Certificate Course in Management of Covid-19 by Govt. Of Gujarat and PlexusMDKnow more...
Various surface treatment options have been adopted with the aim to improve osseointegration, reducing the overall treatment time.

Implant stability of early loaded implants with different modified surfaces was compared in the present study. The study is published in the BMC Oral Health.

Patients randomly received SA (alumina sandblasted and acid-etched), NH (bioabsorbable apatite nanocoating), or SLA (large-grit sandblasted and acid-etched) surface implants. Outcome measures were: implant success, implant stability, and periodontal parameters.

The implant stability was measured at the time of implant placement (primary stability) and six weeks after (prosthesis delivery, secondary stability). Osstell and Periotest were applied to take all the measurements. The primary and secondary stability were compared in the three study groups Finally the peri-implant probing depth appearing after three months of loading was checked on 6 points around to the implant-supported prostheses.

A total of 75 implants with different lengths and diameters were inserted into various positions.

--One implant failed spontaneously at the fourth week after implant placement.

--The survival rate was 98.7%. Comparing the primary and secondary stability values, the data were significantly improved in every group.

--The difference was the highest in the NH group, however, this difference was not significant compared to the two other groups.

--Good periodontal parameters were experienced in all the tested implants, independently by the groups.

With the limitation of the present study, all the implants showed improved stability six weeks after implant placement. A trend of the higher results was found for the NH group.