Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 21, 2025
In situ Compressive Loading and Correlative Noninvasive Imaging of the Bone-periodontal Ligament-tooth Fibrous Joint
Published on: March 7, 2014
Evaluation of Pre- and Post-loading Peri-implant Crestal Bone Levels Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography: An In Vivo
Aparna Trivedi1, Shivangi Trivedi2, Harshita Narang3
1Department of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Implantology, Maharana Pratap College of Dentistry and Research Center, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Aim:
To evaluate the buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal crestal bone around implant using CBCT analysis having buccal crestal bone width of 1 mm after placement of implant and after 3 months of loading.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-five patients between 18 and 60 years of age with adequate bone width and height were selected for this in-vivo study with single or multiple missing teeth. Surgical stent was fabricated for all of them by using self-cure acrylic resin for selection of implant according to the availability of bone, and gutta-percha was used as radio-opaque marker to locate the implant site. After proper analysis, in the first stage surgery, implants were placed. After 3 months to this, the second stage surgery was performed followed by elastomeric impression for porcelain fused to metal prosthesis fabrication. The buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal bone width and height were evaluated by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). CBCT was standardized in terms of FOV (field of vision), slice thickness, and interval. After 3 months of loading, CBCT was taken to evaluate the alteration in the crestal bone around implants. Pre- and post-loading, crestal bone on four locations was measured by using CBCT software.
Results:
There is significant bone loss at all the locations, buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal, at the time of placement and after 3 months of loading of implant (p <0.05). The mean difference of 0.840, 0.933, 0.840, and 0.380 at buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal locations, respectively, shows statistically significant difference in pre- and post-values of mean bone loss at buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal positions. Pre-loading bone loss was maximum in the distal surface, while post-loading bone loss was maximum in the buccal surface.
Conclusion:
From this study, it is concluded that although crestal bone loss was higher before implant placement, there was significant alteration in crestal bone even after loading of implant.
Clinical Significance:
It is widely accepted that the bone loss around the implant crest module is multidisciplinary in nature. Long-term preservation of the crestal bone is a paramount for successfully functioning of dental implants. Preserving crestal bone will help in dissipating the functional load. With proper treatment planning by the practitioner, this technical contribution to the crestal bone loss can be minimized and long-term survival of dental implants can be achieved.
