• Puneet Wadhwa, Seung-Kook Kim, Hyun-Jin Kim, Ho-Kyung Lim, Qi Jia, Heng-Bo Jiang, and Eui-Seok Lee.
• Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Korea University Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Seoul 08308, Korea.
• Medicina (Kaunas). 2021 Sep 25; 57 (10).

AbstractBackground and Objectives: The aim of our study was to test whether wide diameter (6 mm) implants perform differently from standard diameter (4 mm) implants in terms of marginal bone level and survival rate. Materials and Methods: Our sample comprised 72 patients who underwent surgery; a total of 80 implants were placed in the maxillary or mandibular molar region. Patients were divided into two groups according to the diameter of the implant, and were followed up for six years after the final setting of the prosthetics. In the test group, 40 implants with 6-mm diameter were inserted; in the control group, 40 standard diameter implants were inserted. Using panoramic radiographs, we investigated mesial and distal marginal bone levels around the implant fixtures. Results: After the first implant surgery, three implants, including one wide diameter and two standard diameter implants, failed due to lack of osseointegration. We did not note any fixture fracture during the six-year follow-up. After loading, we observed a six-year survival rate of 97.29% with no statistically significant difference from standard diameter implants, with a survival rate of 94.87%. Conclusions: This study shows that 6-mm diameter implants may be considered in the presence of adequate alveolar ridge width in the posterior maxillary and mandibular regions.

13 keywords...

hide…