Get access
Clinical Oral Implants Research

Biological width formation to immediate implants placed at different level in relation to the crestal bone: an experimental study in dogs

Authors

  • Bruno Negri,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of General Dentistry, Implants and Biomaterials, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    • Corresponding author:

      Bruno Negri

      General Dentistry, Implants and Biomaterials, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia 30007, Spain

      Tel.: (0034) 966766003

      Fax: (0034) 966766003

      e-mail: brunonegri2000@yahoo.com

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Marta López Marí,

    1. Department of General Dentistry, Implants and Biomaterials, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • José Eduardo Maté Sánchez de Val,

    1. Department of Restorative, Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Giovanna Iezzi,

    1. Department of Biomaterials, Dental School, Chieti-Pescara University, Chieti, Italy
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Luis Alberto Bravo González,

    1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author
  • José Luis Calvo Guirado

    1. Department of General Dentistry, Implants and Biomaterials, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose/Aim

Evaluate differences in bone remodeling, soft tissue reactions and biological width formation around immediate implants placed at different level in relation to the crestal bone in beagle dogs.

Material and methods

The mandibular second, third and fourth premolars of six beagle dogs were extracted, and three implants were placed in the right side of each dog. Healing abutments were adjusted (n = 18). After 4 weeks, the procedure was repeated on the left side of the mandible (n = 18). Randomly, three implants were placed at crestal level (control group), and three implants were placed 2 mm subcrestally (test group) in relation to the crestal bone in each animal. The dogs were sacrificed after 8 weeks from the first surgical procedure, and biopsies were obtained. Samples were processed for ground sectioning. Histometric analysis was carried out to compare buccal and lingual bone resorption, soft tissue behavior and biological width formation in both groups.

Results

Crestal bone resorption was higher in the test group when considering the difference of 2 mms (IS-B = 2.05 ± 0.36 mm, control; 1.75 (+2)  ± 0.38 mm, test). However, the dimensions of the biological width were similar for both groups (PM-C = 3.34 ± 0.53 mm, control; 3.13 ± 0.55 mm, test).

Conclusions

The alterations that occurred in the peri-implant soft tissues may be related to the hard tissue remodeling, showing similar quantitative findings in the biological width formation in both groups. Even though the subcrestal placement might reduce the distance from the implant shoulder to the first bone-to-implant contact and reestablish the biological width dimension in a most coronal position, it might not have any effect on minimizing the marginal bone loss.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary