EVALUATION OF MARGINAL BONE LOSS IN HYBRID AND NOT-HYBRID SURFACES: A NARRATIVE REVIEW

M. Costantini*, D. De Santis and A. Rossi

Head and Neck Department, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Pediatrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona Italy.

*Correspondence to:
Dr. Mattia Costantini,
Head and Neck Department,
Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Pediatrics and Gynecology,
University of Verona,
37124 Verona, Italy.
e-mail: mattia.costantini98@gmail.com

Received: 19 May, 2018 Accepted: 30 June,2018

Biolife-Publisher.it © 2018 This publication and/or article is for individual use only and may not be further reproduced without written permission from the copyright holder. Unauthorized reproduction may result in financial and other penalties. Disclosure: All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article

ABSTRACT

The surface of an implant should have specific features that influence osseointegration. Many different surfaces were used and studied in the literature, especially rough surfaces. Hybrid surface implants could be better than traditional rough implants in marginal bone loss (MBL), peri-implantitis and bone-to-implant contact. This retrospective review analyses different studies which compare implants with and without hybrid surfaces. Usually, the MBL is measured with digital radiographs. Standard radiographs are also helpful in the evaluation of osseointegration. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed database. The keywords allowed us to find studies concerning hybrid surfaces. Thereafter, a selection of the studies had to be made by reading the full text. Six articles were found in PubMed and formed the basis of the study. In this review, MBL was the subject of the research. Hybrid surface with different roughness seems to have better results concerning survival rate, MBL and presence of peri-implantitis. However, further investigations are needed.

KEYWORDS: hybrid surface, dental implants, osseointegration, marginal bone loss