後部領域のノボワイドボディインプラントに関する遡及的な多施設研究

BACKGROUND: Wide implants are recommended as "rescues" after failure to increase primary stability in extraction sockets or in poor quality bone.その結果、通常の直径のインプラントと比較した劣った結果が報告されています。 PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the outcome of a novo wide-body implant (Max® implant, Southern Implants®, Irene, South Africa) designed for placement in the posterior regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In four private practices, patients with at least one Max implant were examined by two independent examiners to determine implant survival and marginal bone loss.治療結果への影響を決定するために、外科的、補綴、患者関連のパラメーターを評価しました。 RESULTS: Seventy-five patients (31 male, 44 female), with a mean age of 58 years, received 93 Max implants (59 maxilla, 34 mandible) of 8 to 10 mm width.モル抽出ソケットに27個のインプラントがあり、成熟した骨に27個のインプラントがすぐにロードされました。抽出ソケットで42、成熟した骨で22が遅延しました。平均の追跡調査は14か月（6-34）で、4つのインプラントが故障しました（4.3％）。1年後の平均骨損失は0.46 mmでした（SD 1.08;範囲-5.45-3.25）。合計91.4％は、最初の年に1.5 mm未満の骨を失いました。インプラントの生存率は、それぞれ即時および遅延荷重インプラントで89.7％と98.4％、遅延および即時配置で95.8％と95.7％でした。配置時間、荷重の時間、外科的プロトコル、または補綴設計は結果に影響しませんでした。 結論：研究の限界内で、最大インプラントは、負荷や外科的プロトコルに関係なく、1年後に95.7％の生存率と安定した骨状態を示しました。柔らかい組織の変化を評価するには、将来の前向き研究が必要です。

BACKGROUND: Wide implants are recommended as "rescues" after failure to increase primary stability in extraction sockets or in poor quality bone. Consequently, inferior results compared with regular diameter implants have been reported. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the outcome of a novo wide-body implant (Max® implant, Southern Implants®, Irene, South Africa) designed for placement in the posterior regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In four private practices, patients with at least one Max implant were examined by two independent examiners to determine implant survival and marginal bone loss. Surgical, prosthetic, and patient-related parameters were evaluated to determine their influence on the treatment outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients (31 male, 44 female), with a mean age of 58 years, received 93 Max implants (59 maxilla, 34 mandible) of 8 to 10 mm width. Twenty-seven implants in molar extraction sockets and two in mature bone were immediately loaded; 42 in extraction sockets and 22 in mature bone were delayed loaded. The mean follow-up was 14 months (6-34), and four implants failed (4.3%); mean bone loss after 1 year was 0.46 mm (SD 1.08; range -5.45-3.25). A total of 91.4% lost <1.5 mm of bone during the first year. The implant survival rate was 89.7% and 98.4%, respectively, for the immediate and delayed loaded implants and 95.8% and 95.7% for delayed and immediate placement. Time of placement, time of loading, surgical protocol, or prosthetic design did not affect the outcome. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, the Max implant demonstrated a survival rate of 95.7% and stable bone conditions after a year, irrespective of loading or surgical protocol. Future prospective studies are needed to evaluate the soft and hard tissue changes in time.