Editorial Type:
Article Category: Other
 | 
Online Publication Date: 01 Aug 2015

A Prospective Noninterventional Study to Evaluate Survival and Success of Reduced Diameter Implants Made From Titanium-Zirconium Alloy

Prof Dr med, Dr med dent,
DDS,
DDS,
BDS,
DDS,
, and
Page Range: e118 – e125
DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-13-00149
Save
Download PDF

Narrow diameter implants may be at increased risk of overload due to occlusal forces; therefore, implants with higher fatigue strength may be beneficial. The aim of this observational study was to evaluate survival and success of narrow diameter (Ø 3.3 mm) TiZr alloy (Roxolid, Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) implants for 2 years in daily dental practice. This was a prospective, non-interventional, multicenter study; no specific patient inclusion or exclusion criteria were applied. Each patient received at least one TiZr implant; the treatment plan, including implant loading and final restoration, was at the investigator's discretion. The primary outcome was implant survival and success after 1 year. Secondary outcomes included 2-year survival and success and marginal bone level change. A total of 603 implants were placed in 357 patients. Cumulative survival and success rates were 97.8% and 97.6%, respectively, after 1 year and 97.6% and 97.4%, respectively, after 2 years. Bone levels remained stable in the majority of patients, and soft tissue remained stable up to 2 years. Within the limitations of a non-interventional study design, TiZr implants showed excellent survival and success with minimal bone loss up to 2 years in daily dental practice. The results compare favorably with those of small-diameter implants in controlled clinical trials.

<bold>
  <sc>Figure 1.</sc>
</bold>
Figure 1.

Types of implants used in this study.


<bold>
  <sc>Figures 2 and 3.</sc>
</bold>
Figures 2 and 3.

Figure 2. A clinical case (provided by Dr J. Tondela) of a Bone Level Narrow CrossFit TiZr 3.3 mm diameter implant restored with a cemented zirconia single crown at position 12. (a) Frontal view before implant placement. (b) Soft tissue emergence profile. (c) Zirconium abutment. (d) Lateral view at the 2-year follow-up. (e) Intra-oral radiograph after dental implant placement (day 0). (f) Intra-oral radiograph at the 1-year follow-up. (g) Intra-oral radiograph at the 2-year follow-up. Figure 3. Marginal bone level changes mesial and distal after 1 and 2 years.


Contributor Notes

Corresponding author, e-mail: al-nawas@mkg.klinik.uni-mainz.de
  • Download PDF