Long-Term Marginal Bone Stability of BOPT Restorations on Bone-Level vs. Tissue-Level Implants: An 8-Year Prospective Clinical Study.
M-A Navarro-Moxica, M García-Selva, A Roig-Vanaclocha et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This prospective randomized clinical study compared eight-year marginal bone loss in 122 posterior bone-level and tissue-level implants restored using the Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique (BOPT) in 71 patients. Tissue-level implants had lower mesial marginal bone loss than bone-level implants (0.49 ± 0.77 mm versus 0.78 ± 0.93 mm; p = 0.031). Distal and mean bone loss did not differ significantly between systems. Fixed partial dentures were associated with greater mesial bone loss than single crowns, while arch location was not significantly associated with remodeling.
Key findings
- Mesial marginal bone loss was lower with tissue-level than bone-level implants: 0.49 ± 0.77 mm versus 0.78 ± 0.93 mm; p = 0.031.
- Distal and mean marginal bone loss did not differ significantly between implant systems.
- Fixed partial dentures were associated with greater mesial bone loss than single crowns (p = 0.025).
- Arch location was not significantly associated with bone remodeling (p = 0.838).
Why it matters
The findings suggest that long-term marginal bone behavior may differ by implant system at the mesial aspect, but not across all measured sites or in mean bone loss. The prosthesis-type association also indicates that restoration configuration may be relevant when interpreting bone outcomes. These results help frame expectations while underscoring that the observed differences cannot be assigned to placement level or BOPT alone.
What to keep in mind
The implant systems differed in macrogeometry, surface characteristics, and transmucosal configuration, so effects cannot be attributed exclusively to placement level or BOPT. Bone assessment relied on two-dimensional radiographs.