Three-Year Retrospective Comparative Study between Implants with Same Body-Design but Different Crest Module Configurations
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 25, 2025
Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Silvio Mario Meloni1, Luca Melis2, Erta Xhanari3
1School of Dentistry, University of Sassari, 07100 Sardinia, Italy.
Abstract:
Crest module can be defined as the portion of a two-piece implant designed to retain the prosthetic components and to allows the maintenance of the peri-implant tissues in the transition zone.
Aim:
To evaluate the three-year after loading clinical and radiographic data, collected from patients that received a prosthetic rehabilitation on conical connection implants with partial machined collar (PMC; CC Group) and same body-designed implants, with flat-to-flat connection and groovy neck design (FC Group).
Materials And Methods:
A retrospective chart review of previously collected data, including documents, radiographs, and pictures of patients who received at least one implant-supported restoration on NobelReplace CC PMC or NobelReplace Tapered Groovy implants was performed. Patients with at least three years of follow-up after final loading were considered for this study. Outcomes measures were implant and prosthesis failures, any biological or technical complications, marginal bone loss.
Results:
Eight-two patients (44 women, 38 men; average age 55.6) with 152 implants were selected and divided in two groups with 77 (CC group) and 75 (FC group), respectively. Three years after final loading, one implant in CC group failed (98.7% survival rate), while no implants failed in FC group (100% survival rate). One restoration failed in CC group (98.7% survival rate) with no restoration failing in the FC one (100% survival rate). Differences were not statistically significant (p = 1.0). Three years after final loading, mean marginal bone loss was 0.22 ± 0.06 mm (95% CI 0.2-0.24) in CC group and 0.62 ± 0.30 mm (95% CI 0.52-0.72) in FC group. The difference was statistically significant (0.40 ± 0.13 mm; 95% CI 0.3-0.5; p = 0.003).
Conclusion:
with the limitation of this retrospective comparative study, implants with conical connection and partial machined collar seem to achieve a trend of superior outcomes if compared with implants with flat connection and groovy collar design.
