Original study - ZZI 02/2016

The influence of various implant types on peri-implant bone loss – a retrospective radiological evaluation

A review by Renouard et al. [21] categorized implants with a diameter of ? 4.5 mm as “thick” implants. The authors were able to establish a trend of higher bone loss rates for them. A finite element analysis showed a significantly greater effect on the reduction of force on the crestal bone when the implant diameter was increased than when different implant lengths were used [4]. Regardless of the implant system used, our data showed smaller diameters (? 3.5 mm) to be superior to larger diameters. However, only 41 of the 202 implants with smaller diameters were Camlog implants. The others were one-piece or Astra Tech implants, thus favoring this size.

A study by Galindo-Moreno et al. [10] observed a significantly higher level of bone loss after 12 months for augmented bone than for non-augmented bone. During the observation period, implants placed in augmented bone sites incurred more bone loss on the whole than other implants. However, the type of augmentation was also important. Implants placed in augmentation sites with little or no increase in volume (sinus lifting, bone compaction and splitting, alveolar ridge spreading) incurred little bone loss, whereas those placed in conjunction with bone apposition or classical sinus lifting led to more bone loss. In the present study, the bone loss appeared to be determined by the connector geometry rather than the type of augmentation.

The clinical conclusions derived from results of the present study suggest that Morse taper implant/abutment connections led to significantly less bone loss around implants than butt joints. Other factors such as implant length and diameter as well as augmentation procedures may influence marginal bone loss in addition.


Irrespective of the type of load, restoration, augmentation, or location, measurement of successive radiographs of Astra Tech implants placed during almost 18 years in a dental practice showed the least amount of peri-implant bone loss, followed by DENTSPLY Friadent and Camlog implants. The implant/abutment connector geometry was shown to significantly influence the progression of bone loss symptoms.

Acknowledgements: Manuscript preparation and review was in part supported by DENTSPLY IH GmbH (Mannheim/Germany).

Conflict of interest: The author Wolfram Knöfler declares the following possible conflicts of interest as defined by the ICMJE: He specified that he received fees for running courses for Camlog, Astra Tech and Dentsply Friadent, expenses for the statistical computations from Dentsply Friadent/Dentsply Implants, traveling expenses from all engaged Companies.


1 Dental practice on oral and maxillofacial surgery, implantology and aesthetic dentistry, Leipzig

2 Dental practice Dr. Eva Wostratzky & Dr. Stefan Wostratzky, Leipzig

3 Dentsply Implants, MannheimÜbersetzung: LinguaDent

1 Those makes were used which were commercially available until completion of data collection in April 2012.

2 The statistical calculations were carried out by ACOMED-Statistik, Leipzig, Germany.

PAGE: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5