A comparative study of the clinical efficacy of Screw Vent implants versus Brånemark fixtures, installed in a periodontal clinic.
1992 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 3, no 1, 32-41 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
The clinical success of 85 Screw Vent and 107 Brånemark implants, consecutively installed in a private periodontal clinic under the same conditions and by the same operator, is compared. Mobile implants were removed and considered as failures. Intra-oral radiographs were assessed for the presence of peri-implant radiolucencies and for analysis of bone loss after functional loading. 85 Screw Vent implants were installed in 31 patients. Of 23 implants installed in 9 mandibles, none failed after 16.8 (range 12-25) months of function. Of 62 Screw Vent implants installed in 23 maxillae, 6 failed at abutment connection, 1 failed after 2 months and 2 after 13 months of function. The absolute failure rate after 13.2 (range 6-24) months was 9/62. Mean loss of bone was 1.47 mm (-1.0- +4) after 12 months of functional loading. 107 Brånemark fixtures were installed in 25 patients. Of 51 fixtures inserted in 12 mandibles, none failed; of 56 fixtures installed in 13 maxillae 1 failed before and 2 failed during abutment connection. The absolute failure is 3/56. All remaining fixtures were immobile after loading. 13 fixtures were more than 6 months in function. Only short-term comparison between both systems is possible because the observation time is longer for the Screw Vent implants. In the 1st year, only 1 implant system was available to the periodontist. Short-term comparison reveals 11.3% versus 5.3% of cumulative failure after 6 months for the Screw Vent and Brånemark implants, respectively. The results indicate that clinical efficacy is as effectively obtained with Screw Vent as with Brånemark implants in the mandible. The outcome of treatment with Screw Vent implants in the maxilla seems less predictable.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
1992. Vol. 3, no 1, 32-41 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-89554PubMedID: 1420725OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-89554DiVA: diva2:721472