Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 19, 2025

An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Peri-implant bone-level changes in the second decade of loading with regard to the implant-abutment connection: a
Anne Brigitte Kruse1, Vanessa Wild2, Petra Ratka-Krüger3
1Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. anne.kruse@uniklinik-freiburg.de.
Background:
This retrospective study investigates the change in the peri-implant bone level (PBL) during the 2nd decade of intraoral function in patients complying with a 'supportive implant therapy' (SIT) program. The results were statistically analyzed with respect to the implant abutment connection used.
Methods:
In a private practice, only patients with 20-year SIT compliance were identified. Of these, all patients with 10- and 20-year radiographs available were selected. Therefore, no control group was possible and implant losses had to be excluded. Two experienced researchers assessed the peri-implant bone levels. As three different abutment connection concepts (bone-level butt-joint, bone-level conical and tissue-level conical) and two different implant surfaces (machined vs. roughened) were involved, statistical analyses were performed to detect potential differences.
Results:
Ninety-three implants from 36 patients with 20-year SIT compliance and available radiographs were included in the study. At study baseline (10 years intraoral), a mean bone loss of - 1.7 mm (median - 1.2; standard deviation [sd] 1.4, range: 0 to - 7.2) was recorded. After 20 years, we found a mean bone loss of - 2.5 mm (median - 2.3, sd 1.79, range: - 0.5 to + 7.4). Furthermore, we found a mean bone loss of 0.8 mm in intraoral function from year 10 to year 20 (mean: 0.08 mm per year); this change was independent of the abutment connection type.
Conclusions:
During the 2nd decade of function, peri-implant bone loss in patients with SIT compliance might be small in value and should not be expected in all implants.
More Related Videos
07:09In situ Compressive Loading and Correlative Noninvasive Imaging of the Bone-periodontal Ligament-tooth Fibrous Joint
Published on: March 7, 2014
06:36Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025