임플란트의 collar design이 변연골과 연조직에 미치는 영향 = Effects of implant collar design on marginal bone and soft tissue

국문 초록 (Abstract)

연구 목적: 임플란트 경부가 잘 설계된 경우 양호한 연조직 반응을 통해 변연골을 보존하는데 도움이 된다. 본 실험에서는 연, 경조직 경계부에 가장 가까이 위치하는 임플란트의 collar design이 변연골 변화와 연조직 반응에 미치는 영향을 동물실험을 통해 알아보고자 하였다.

연구 재료 및 방법: 2마리의 건강한 Beagle dog에 임플란트 collar design만 다른 두 종류의 임플란트(Neobiotech Co. Seoul, Korea)를 식립하였다. Collar에 bevel 을 부여한 군(Bevel 군)과 "S"자 형태를 부여한 군(Bioseal 군)으로 나누어 마리 당 7개, 군당 7개, 총 14개의 임플란트를 무작위로 식립한 후 Healing abutment를 즉시 체결하였다. 디지털 표준구내 방사선사진을 이용해 4주 간격으로 총 12주간 근원심 변연골 변화를 관찰하였고, 12주에 희생하여 조직학적 분석을 통해 협설 변연골 흡수 및 임플란트 주변 연조직 반응을 평가하였다. Mann-Whitney test를 통해 동일한 방사선 사진 촬영 시점에서 근원심 변연골 변화량 및 조직계측치를 군 간 비교하였고, Kruskal-Wallis test를 통해 방사선 사진상 근원심 변연골 변화량이 시간에 따른 차이가 있는지 군 내 분석 한 후 Duncan test를 통해 사후 검증하였다(α=.05).

결과: 방사선학적 분석 결과 각 촬영 시점에서 두 군간 근원심 변연골 변화량의 차이를 보이지 않았다(P>.05). 군 내에서 시간에 따른 근원심 변연골의 흡수량을 분석한 결과 Bevel 군에서는 시간에 따른 차이를 보이지 않았으나 (P>.05), Bioseal 군에서는 시간에 따른 차이를 보였으며, 4주및8주와 비교했을 때 12주에서 변연골의 증가를 보였다(P<.05). 조직학적 분석 결과 협설측 변연골 흡수량에서 두 군간 차이를 보이지 않았으나 (P>.05), Bevel 군에 비해 Bioseal 군에서 더 견고한 결합조직부착을 관찰할 수 있었으며, 생물학적 폭경의 값은 두 집단 간 차이를 보이지 않은 반면에 (P>.05), 접합상피부착은 Bevel 군에서 유의하게 길었고, 결합조직부착은 Bioseal 군에서 더 길게 나타났다(P<.05).

결론: Bevel 군에 비해 Bioseal 군에서 결합조직부착은 길게 형성된 반면에 접합상피부착은 더 짧게 나타났으며, 생물학적 폭경과 초기 변연골 흡수에는 차이가 없음을 알 수 있었다. 연조직 반응의 차이가 실제 기능하중 하에서 변연골 변화에 미치는 영향에 대해서 향후 연구가 필요할 것으로 생각된다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of implant collar design on marginal bone change and soft tissue response by an animal test.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two types of Implant (Neobiotech Co. Seoul, Korea) that only differs in collar design were planted on two healthy Beagle dogs. The implants were divided into two groups, the first group with a beveled collar (Bevel Group) and the second group with "S" shaped collar (Bioseal group). Standardized intraoral radiographs were used to investigate the mesio-distal change of the marginal bone. Histological analysis was done to evaluate the bucco-lingual marginal bone resorption and the soft tissue response adjacent to the implant. Mann-Whitney test was done to compare the mesio-distal marginal bone change at equivalent time for taking the radiographs and the tissue measurements between the groups.

RESULTS. Radiographic and histological analysis showed that there was no difference in marginal bone change between the two groups (P>.05). Histological analysis showed Bioseal group had more rigid connective tissue attachment than the Bevel group. There was no difference in biological width (P>.05). Bevel group showed significantly longer junctional epithelium attachment and Bioseal group showed longer connective tissue attachment (P<.05).

CONCLUSION. For three months there were no differences in marginal bone change between the Bevel group and the Bioseal group. As for the soft tissue adjacent to the implant, Bioseal group showed longer connective tissue attachment while showing shorter junctional epithelium attachment. There were no differences in biologic width.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Rams TE, "The subgingival microbial flora associated with human dental implants" 51 : 529-534, 1984

2 Abrahamsson I, "The mucosal barrier following abutment dis/reconnection. An experimental study in dogs" 24 : 568-572, 1997

3 Duyck J, "The influence of static and dynamic loading on marginal bone reactions around osseointegrated implants: an animal experimental study" 12 : 207-218, 2001

4 Miyata T, "The influence of controlled occlusal overload on peri-implant tissue: a histologic study in monkeys" 13 : 677-683, 1998

5 Miyata T, "The influence of controlled occlusal overload on peri-implant tissue. part 4: a histologic study in monkeys" 17 : 384-390, 2002

6 Miyata T, "The influence of controlled occlusal overload on peri-implant tissue. Part 3: A histologic study in monkeys" 15 : 425-431, 2000

7 Tarnow DP, "The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest" 71 : 546-549, 2000

8 Lekholm U, "The condition of the soft tissues at tooth and fixture abutments supporting fixed bridges. A microbiological and histological study" 13 : 558-562, 1986

9 Misch CE, "Stress factors: influence on treatment. In: Misch CE. Dental Implant Prosthetics" Mosby 71-90, 2005

10 de Almeida FD, "Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone level around internal-hex implants with switched platform: a clinical case report series" 26 : 587-592, 2011

11 Lazzara RJ, "Platform switching: a new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels" 26 : 9-17, 2006

12 Gardner DM, "Platform switching as a means to achieving implant esthetics" 71 : 34-37, 2005

13 Branemark PI, "Osseointegration and its experimental background" 50 : 399-410, 1983

14 배은경, "Marginal tissue response to different Implant neck design" 대한치과보철학회 46 (46): 602-609, 2008

15 Adell R, "Marginal tissue reactions at osseointegrated titanium fixtures (I). A 3-year longitudinal prospective study" 15 : 39-52, 1986

16 Isidor F, "Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys" 7 : 143-152, 1996

17 Berglundh T, "Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited" 23 : 971-973, 1996

18 Korean academy of oral and maxillofacial, "Intraoral radiography. In: Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology" Narae publishing 70-115, 2001

19 Baffone GM, "Influence of various implant platform configurations on peri-implant tissue dimensions: an experimental study in dog" 22 : 438-444, 2011

20 Kim S, "Influence of transmucosal designs of three one-piece implant systems on early tissue responses: a histometric study in beagle dogs" 25 : 309-314, 2010

21 Kim DY, "Influence of platform switching on crestal bone resorption" 대한치주과학회 38 (38): 135-142, 2008

22 Quirynen M, "Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Branemark system" 3 : 104-111, 1992

23 Hermann F, "Factors influencing the preservation of the periimplant marginal bone" 16 : 165-175, 2007

24 Linkow LI, "Factors influencing long-term implant success" 63 : 64-73, 1990

25 Haider R, "Effects of drill cooling and bone structure on IMZ implant fixation" 8 : 83-91, 1993

26 Maeda Y, "Biomechanical analysis on platform switching: is there any biomechanical rationale?" 18 : 581-584, 2007

27 Hermann JS, "Biologic width around titanium implants. A physiologically formed and stable dimension over time" 11 : 1-11, 2000

28 Cochran DL, "Biologic width around titanium implants. A histometric analysis of the implanto-gingival junction around unloaded and loaded nonsubmerged implants in the canine mandible" 68 : 186-198, 1997

29 Piattelli A, "An histologic and histomorphometric study of bone reactions to unloaded and loaded non-submerged single implants in monkeys: a pilot study" 19 : 314-320, 1993

30 윤희정, "A short-term clinical study of marginal bone level change around microthreaded and platformswitched implants" 대한치주과학회 41 (41): 211-217, 2011

31 Baumgarten H, "A new implant design for crestal bone preservation: initial observations and case report" 17 : 735-740, 2005

32 Quaresma SE, "A finite element analysis of two different dental implants: stress distribution in the prosthesis, abutment, implant, and supporting bone" 34 : 1-6, 2008

33 Lee SY, "A 3-year prospective radiographic evaluation of marginal bone level around different implant systems" 37 : 538-544, 2010

34 Adell R, "A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw" 10 : 387-416, 1981