Evaluation of Immediate Loading Mini-implant versus Traditional Implant (Clinical and Radiographic Study) | ||||
| Dental Science Updates | ||||
| Article 5, Volume 4, Issue 2, September 2023, Page 243-251 PDF (1.73 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/dsu.2023.158093.1141 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Abdallah Mohamed Mokhtar  1; Tamer Hamed2; Mohamed Ahmed El-Sholkamy3
| ||||
| 1Oral and Maxillofacial surgery department, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University | ||||
| 2Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery College of Dentistry University of Science and Technology of Fujairah | ||||
| 3Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Replacing lost teeth by employing dental implants has represented a challenge since ancient times. Using mini-implants is more favorable than conventional ones, not only for surgeons but also for patients. Aim: The current study aimed to compare the conventional and mini dental implants regarding primary stability, vertical bone loss after three- and nine-month post-surgery, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth in three- and nine-month. Materials and Methods: The current study used two types of dental implants, conventional dental implants (Dentium super line) and mini dental implants (Dentium slim line). Accordingly, two examination groups were defined, Group I and Group II. Each group included eight dental implants in healthy patients aged 31-48. All implants were subjected to clinical and radiographic examinations either before surgery or after surgery. Both conventional and mini-implants were checked based on primary stability, vertical bone loss after three- and nine- months post-surgery, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth in three- and nine- months. Results: The results showed no significant differences between the conventional and mini dental implants regarding the primary stability and vertical bone loss in three- and nine months. Also, clinically there is no significant difference in plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth. Conclusion: The mini-implant can be a promising alternative when the ridge width does not accommodate the conventional type. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Immediately loaded mini-implants; Conventional implants; Clinical examination; Radiographic examination | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 319 PDF Download: 373 |
||||
