Retrospective Study of GS II Implant(Osstem) with an Internal Connection with Microthreads

Micro thread를 포함한 GSII RBM임플란트(Osstem)의 후향적 임상연구

  • Chee, Young-Deok (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Hwan (Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Oh, Sang-Chun (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University)
  • 지영덕 (원광대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 이재환 (원광대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 오상천 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2009.11.15
  • Accepted : 2009.12.25
  • Published : 2009.12.31


Since the introduction of the concept of osseointegration in dental implants, high long-term success rates have been achieved and accepted as viable option for the treatment of fully and partially edentulous patients. Although the use of domestic implants have increased dramatically, there are few studies on domestic implants with clinical and objective long-term data. 96 endosseous implants placed in 31 patients at Wonkwang University Sanbon Dental Hospital were examined to determine the effect of various factors on implant survival rate and marginal bone loss, through clinical and radiographic results. The design of endosseous implant used to this study is straight with the microthread.(GS II RBM Fixture) 1. 3 fixtures were lost, resulting in 96.9% cumulative survival rate. 2. Survival rate in fifties was significantly lower (93.6%) and no significant difference in marginal bone loss was found according to gender. 3. Survival rates were 95.6% in the maxillary molar area and 97.3% in the mandible molar area. 4. No significant difference in survival rate was found according to presence of bone grafts, type of prostheses, implant position, and length and diameter of implant. 5. A factor influencing marginal bone loss was presence of type of prostheses, while facters such a length, diameter of fixture and bone grafts had no statistically significant effect on crestal bone loss. This study indicates the amount of marginal bone loss around implant has maintained a relative stable during follow-up periods.


Supported by : 원광대학교


  1. Jemt T, Lekhom U, Groundahl K. A 3-Year follow-up study of early single implant restoration ad modum Br${\aa}$nemark. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 10:341-349, 1990
  2. North MR. Marginal bone levels at single tooth implants with a conical fixture design. The influence of surface macro- and microstructure. Clin Oral Implants Res 9:91-99, 1998
  3. Peñarrocha M, Palomar M, Sanchís JM et al. Radiologic study of marginal bone loss around 108 dental implants and its relationship to smoking, implant location and morphology. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19:861-867, 2004
  4. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Quirynern M, Duyck J, van Steenberge D, Jacobs R. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. part 2 ; alongitudinal radiographic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:390-5
  5. Tong DC, Rioux K, Drangsholt M et al : A review of survival rates for implants placed in grafted maxillary sinuses using meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 13 : 175, 1998
  6. Zitzmann NU, Sxharer P, Marinello CP. Long-term results of implants treated with guided bone regeneration: A 5-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implnats 16:355-366, 2001
  7. Abrahammson I, Berglundh T. Tissue Characteristics at Microthreaded Implants: An Experimental Study in Dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res 8:107-113, 2006
  8. Wyatt CCL, Zarb GA. Treatment outcomes of patients with implant-supported fixed partial prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 13:204- 211, 1998
  9. Kim JS, Chang HH et al : Preprothetic stage dental implant failure. J KAOMS 2 : 178, 2001
  10. Engquist B, Astrand P, Dahlgren S, Engquist E, Feldmann H, Grondahl K. Marginal bone reaction to oral implants: a prospective comparative study of Astra Tech and Branemark System implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 13:30-37, 2002
  11. Robert Haas, Nikoletta Mensdorff-Poui : Survival of 1,920 IMZ implants followed for up to 100 months. Int J Oral maxillofacial implants Vol.11, No.5 581, 1996
  12. Buser D, Mericske-stern R, Bernard JP et al : Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res Jun 8(3) : 161, 1998
  13. Jensen OT : The sinus bone graft, 2nd ed. Quintessence Publishing Co. 63, 2006
  14. Palmer RM, Smith BJ, Palmer PJ, Floyd PD. A prospective study of Astra single tooth implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 8:173-179, 1997
  15. Hertel R, Kalk W. Influence of the dimensions of implant super- structure on peri implant bone loss. Int J Prosthodont 6:18, 1993
  16. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: A review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1:11-25, 1986
  17. Hardt CRE, Grodahl K, Lekholm U, Wennstrom JL. Outcome of implant therapy in relation to experienced loss of periodontal bone support. A retrospective 5-year study. Clin Oral Implants Res 13:488-494, 2002
  18. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B et al. Marginal tissue reactions at osseointegrated titanium fixtures. A 3-year longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 15:39-52, 1986
  19. van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Naert I :'Survival and success rates with oral endosseous implants. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Periodontology'. Berlin: Quintessence Publishing Co 242, 1999
  20. Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Bruggenkate CM et al : The use of reduced healing times on ITI$^{\circledR}$ implants with a sandblasted and etched (SLA) surface : early results from clinical trials on ITI$^{\circledR}$ SLA implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 13 : 144, 2002
  21. Shin SW, Ross Bryant, Zarb G et al : A retrospective study on the treatment outcome of wide-bodied implants. Int J Prosthet Dent 17 : 52, 2004
  22. Hansson S. The implant neck: smooth or provided with retention elements. A biomechanical approach. Clin Oral Implants Res 10:394–405, 1999