Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 6, 2025

11:51
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
15.6K
Marginal bone loss around crestal or subcrestal dental implants: prospective clinical study
Naser Sargolzaie1, Hosein Hoseini Zarch2, Hamidreza Arab1
1Dental Research Center, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Summary
Dental implant success depends on crestal bone stability. This study found no significant difference in marginal bone loss between crestal and subcrestal implant placements after six months.
Area of Science:
- Dental Implantology
- Periodontology
- Oral Surgery
Background:
- Crestal bone stability is crucial for dental implant success.
- Dental implants can be positioned equicrestally (crestal) or subcrestally.
- Understanding implant depth's effect on bone loss is essential.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of dental implant placement depth (crestal vs. subcrestal) on marginal bone loss.
- To compare bone level changes at 3 and 6 months post-surgery.
- To determine if implant positioning affects long-term bone stability.
Main Methods:
- Split-mouth design involving 49 implants in 18 patients.
- Digital parallel radiography used to measure bone levels.
- Measurements taken at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months post-implantation.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in marginal bone loss between crestal and subcrestal implants at 3 or 6 months.
- Mean mesial bone loss: 0.83 mm (crestal) vs. 1.03 mm (subcrestal).
- Mean distal bone loss: 0.81 mm (crestal) vs. 0.88 mm (subcrestal).
- Bone loss was not significantly affected by sex, jaw location, region, or implant dimensions.
Conclusions:
- Implant placement depth (crestal or subcrestal) does not significantly influence marginal bone loss.
- Both placement strategies appear comparable regarding crestal bone stability in the short term.
- Further long-term studies may be warranted to confirm these findings.

