1Postgraduate Student, Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Karnataka, India
2Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Karnataka, India
3Professor & Head, Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Karnataka, India
4Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Karnataka, India
To compare the density of bone in an immediately temporized implant and conventionally placed implant through radiovisiography.
Implants were placed in posterior edentulous mandibular region on either side out of which one was conventional implant and the other was immediately temporized implant. RVGs were taken at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of implant placement. The alveolar bone density was calculated at 6 different points through all the RGVs obtained at different time intervals. The values were obtained by using Image J software. All the mean values obtained were compared at different time intervals in both the groups of implants and were subjected to paired t test
There was no statistically significant difference in the two groups. The mean values of alveolar bone density is more in ITI group than the conventional group at all the intervals of time (142.60± 22.6, 132.81± 23.10, 133.96± 24.88 and 120.67±28.77, 131.61±38.81 and 128.53± 36.05 at baseline, at 3 months and at 6 months in ITI group and conventional group respectively).
Bone density is not affected either in immediately temporized implant or conventionally placed implant during different follow up periods although it is more in the ITI group.
Bone density, Provisionalized implant, Radiovisiograph,
