Oral Biol Res 2019; 43(1): 23-31  https://doi.org/10.21851/obr.43.01.201903.23
Long-term evaluation of the prognosis of straight and tapered implant with resorbable blast media surface: Retrospective clinical study
Won-Woong Jang , Dong-Woo Kang , Young-Kyun Kim*
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
Correspondence to: Young-Kyun Kim, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82 Gumi-ro 173beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam 13620, Korea. Tel: +82-31-787-7541, Fax: +82-31-787-4068, E-mail: kyk0505@snubh.org
Received: January 22, 2019; Revised: February 12, 2019; Accepted: February 13, 2019; Published online: March 31, 2019.
© Oral Biology Research. All rights reserved.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the straight (Osstem GS II) and tapered body (Osstem GS III) implant system. The survival rate and marginal bone loss of 101 implants placed in 36 patients were evaluated retrospectively. In Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital analyzed the medical records of patients who had completed the implant placement between 2005 and 2010. Sex, implant location, diameter and length were investigated. Also, implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, complications were analyzed. The amount of marginal bone loss was measured at 1 year after prosthetics placement and at the last follow up, by panorama and periapical radiography. An independent t-test was used for the analysis of the association of marginal bone loss of GS II and GS III (p=0.05). Out of the 101 implants, which were done on 36 people, 8 implants failed and survival rate was 92.1%. Marginal bone loss at 1 year after prosthetics placement was 0.23 mm in GS II, and 0.05 mm in GS III. At the last follow up, marginal bone loss was 0.51 mm in GS II and 0.29 mm in GS III. Statistically analyzing the long-term marginal bone loss difference between GS II and GS III implant system, the p-value was 0.756 and there was no statistically significant difference between the two. Long-term clinical outcomes of domestic implants by implant systems Osstem GS II and GS III have been satisfactory, and no significant difference in marginal bone loss was observed.
Keywords: Implant, Marginal bone loss, Straight, Tapered

This Article