ORIGINAL ARTICLE - 임플란트 종류 및 식립부위에 따른 안정성에 대한 RFA 분석 |
이희용1, 박민주2, 조현재3, 유기준4, 하정은5, 백대일6, 배광학7 |
1부천사과나무치과의원 2부천사과나무치과의원 3서울대학교 치의학대학원 예방치학교실 4부천사과나무치과의원 5서울대학교 치의학대학원 예방치학교실 6서울대학교 치의학대학원 예방치학교실 7서울대학교 치의학대학원 예방치학교실 |
ORIGINAL ARTICLE - Analysis of RFA related to stabilities by types and areas of dental implants |
Hee-Yong Yi1, Min-Ju Park2, Hyun-Jae Cho3, Ki-Jun Yu4, Jung-Eun Ha5, Dae-Il Baek6, Gwang-Hak Bae7 |
1Apple Tree Dental Clinic 2Apple Tree Dental Clinic 3Dept. of Preventive and Public Health Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University 4Apple Tree Dental Clinic 5Dept. of Preventive and Public Health Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University 6Dept. of Preventive and Public Health Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University 7Dept. of Preventive and Public Health Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University |
|
Abstract |
Objective : This research compared stabilities between two types of dental implant (SLATM, Institut Straumann AG, Waldenburg, Switzerland and SSIITM, Osstem co, Busan, Korea) using Osstell Mentor (Integration Diagnostics AB, Goteborg, Sweden) considering surgery methods, surgery area, diameter of implant, systemic disease, and smoking for obtaining prognosis information when installing fixture of dental implant. Materials & Methods : 206 implants of 131 patients taken by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) were determined as a final sample. Dental implants were installed as protocol of supplier by a excellent dentist who had 10 years experience about dental implants. Before connecting abutments (3 months after installation of fixture), RFA were measured twice for buccal and lingual direction to obtain average value. Results : Dental implants at mandible showed significantly higher stabilities significantly than at maxilla (p<0.001). Diameter 4.8 implants had also higher stabilities than diameter 4.1 in case of SLATM implants (p<0.001). SLATM implants showed more excellent stabilities than SSIITM implants, especially at posterior area of mandible (p=0.045) and premolar area of maxilla (p=0.032). Conclusions : This research revealed higher stabilities of SLATM implants than SSIITM implant, especially at posterior area of mandible (p=0.045) and premolar area of maxilla (p=0.032). |
Key Words:
Implant stability;ISQ (Implant stability Quotient);RFA;Osstell Mentor;SLA surface;RBM surface; |
|