In the 1960 s, the concept of osseointegration was suggested by Prof. Brånemark. Since then, its application in dental implant therapy has made rapid progress. In this investigation, three different types of endosseous implant systems were compared and examined in terms of their clinical survival rates.
From 1989 to 1995, 3 different types of implant system were used in 212 patients. These types were a 2-stage Ti-screw type(Ti-S), a 1-stage Ti-plasma hollow cylinder type(Tip-C), and a 2-stage HA-coated cylinder type (HAp-C).
The cumulative survival rate of each implant system after 5 years is Ti-S 93.8%, Tip-C 93.5%, HAp-C 98.3% respectively. As for the implant body length (mm) and the quality of bone (Lekholm＆Zarb bone density classification) in which the implants were placed are compiled, significant differences in survival rate are apparent among screw, hollow-cylinder, and HA-coated cylinder type implant systems.
As for achieving osseointegration, the cylinder type implant is more effective than the screw type, especially when placed in low quality bone. However, the screw type implant system is more effective than the cylinder for maintaining osseointegration.
As a result, when selecting implant systems, it is necessary to utilize panoramic radiographs in order to assess the availability of bone to determine the length of the implant as well as tomography for diagnosis and select the appropriate implant system.