| Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of different bone types on long-term stability of dental implant treatment in middle-aged and elderly patients through a retrospective study,which was in order to provide some clinical references for dental implant treatment under the background of different bone types.Material and methods: All patients aged 50-70 years old who received dental implant treatment in Yantai Stomatological Hospital,Shandong Province,from January 2011 to December 2015 were reviewed.After strict screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,CBCT and X-ray data of 47 patients including 47 implants were collected.CBCT data were imported into Simplant(Materialise Dental,Belgium)to mesure bone mineral density(BMD)in the proposed planting area to divided patients into type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group and type Ⅳ bone group.Marginal bone loss(MBL),grey-scale value(GSV)and fractal dimension(FD)were measured on X-ray films.Data collected from CBCT and X-ray films were imported into IBM Statistics SPSS 24.0 to make statistical analysis in order to find difference in MBL,BMD,FD between type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group and type Ⅳ bone group.Find variation trends from immediate functional loading to 5 years’ functional loading in BMD between 2 groups.P<0.05 was statistically significant.Results:1.A total of 47 patients were included in this study,including 1 patients with type I bone(2.13%,1/47),24 patients with type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone(51.06%,24/47)and 22 patients with type Ⅳ bone(46.81%,22/47).2.After 5 year’s functional loading,the annual average of mesial and distal MBL of type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group was 0.08±0.12 mm and 0.03±0.12 mm respectively,and 0.01± 0.12 mm and-0.03 ± 0.12 mm respectively for type Ⅳ group.No significant difference was found between groups(P>0.05).3.No significant difference was found in BMD between type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group and type Ⅳ bone group(P>0.05).4.BMD of type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group and type Ⅳ bone group showed an increasing trend respectively from the time of immediate loading to 5 years’ functional loading,but no significant difference was found(P>0.05).5.No significant difference was found in FD between type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone group and type Ⅳ bone group(P>0.05).Conclusion:1.Dental implant treatment of type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone and type Ⅳ bone for middle-aged and elderly patients can achieve similar long-term stability.2.Peri-implant BMD of type Ⅱ-Ⅲ bone and type Ⅳ bone both showed an increasing trend after functional loading in middle-aged and elderly patients. |