Influence of Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique on Peri-Implant Tissues; Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Three-Year Follow-Up. Part I: Hard Tissues

dc.contributor.authorAgustín Panadero, Rubén
dc.contributor.authorBustamante Hernández, Naia
dc.contributor.authorSolá Ruíz, María Fernanda
dc.contributor.authorZubizarreta Macho, Álvaro
dc.contributor.authorFons Font, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorFernández Estevan, Lucía
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-09T16:37:22Z
dc.date.available2021-02-09T16:37:22Z
dc.date.created2019-12
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The objective of this prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to analyze and compare the clinical behavior of three types of prosthesis supported by single implants in the posterior region after three years functional loading. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five implants were divided into three groups according to the type of prosthetic restoration: screw-retained crown (Group GS); cemented crown without finishing line (biologically oriented preparation technique) (Group GBOPT); and conventional cemented crown with finishing line (Group GCC). The clinical behavior of each restoration type was analyzed after 3 years functional loading by analyzing radiographic peri-implant bone loss. Results: GBOPT obtained the least bone loss (p < 0.01) in comparison with GS and GCC. Conclusions: Bone loss around implants is related to the type of prosthetic restoration it supports, whereby cemented BOPT crowns present less bone loss.es_ES
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_ES
dc.identifier.locationN/Aes_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12080/24007
dc.languageenges_ES
dc.rightsCC-BYes_ES
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.rights.uriN/Aes_ES
dc.titleInfluence of Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique on Peri-Implant Tissues; Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Three-Year Follow-Up. Part I: Hard Tissueses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES

Files

Collections