Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept

(1) Background: Early-stage bone resorption following implant placement can significantly impact the long-term success of implants. This study evaluates whether a fully digitally planned implant position based on the E-point concept, along with guided profiling of the supracrestal complex, contribut...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Milan Stoilov, Joerg Winterhoff, Lea Stoilov, Anastasia Timoschenko, Helmut Stark, Florian Heuser, Michael Marder, Dominik Kraus, Norbert Enkling
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-03-01
Series:Journal of Functional Biomaterials
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4983/16/3/93
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850090671582478336
author Milan Stoilov
Joerg Winterhoff
Lea Stoilov
Anastasia Timoschenko
Helmut Stark
Florian Heuser
Michael Marder
Dominik Kraus
Norbert Enkling
author_facet Milan Stoilov
Joerg Winterhoff
Lea Stoilov
Anastasia Timoschenko
Helmut Stark
Florian Heuser
Michael Marder
Dominik Kraus
Norbert Enkling
author_sort Milan Stoilov
collection DOAJ
description (1) Background: Early-stage bone resorption following implant placement can significantly impact the long-term success of implants. This study evaluates whether a fully digitally planned implant position based on the E-point concept, along with guided profiling of the supracrestal complex, contributes to improved stability of peri-implant bone levels. (2) Methods: 29 implants were placed in 27 patients utilizing both immediate (Group 1; n = 19) and delayed placement (Group 2; n = 10) protocols. Implant position and emergence profile were preoperatively determined and consistently executed through guided surgery and CAD/CAM-fabricated restorations. Due to the subcrestal positioning of the implant, a corresponding bone profiler with a guide pin was used to shape the emergence profile and prevent the provisional restoration from impinging on the proximal bone. Provisional restorations were immediately placed to support the emergence profile. Bone level changes were documented radiographically over a two-year period. The first Bone-to-Implant Contact Level (∆ fBIC), change in highest approximal Bone Level (∆ haBL), and formation of an emergence profile width (WEP) were measured. (3) Results: All implants and restorations survived after two years, no significant change in first Bone-to-Implant Contact Level (∆ fBIC = 0 ± 0.02 mm), no change in highest approximal Bone Level (∆ haBL) of −0.23 mm ± 0.71 mm, and formation of an emergence profile width (WEP) averaging 0.18 ± 0.19 mm. (4) Conclusions: Despite the initial stress on the bone caused by bone profiling, guided implant placement and bone shaping, supported by an immediate provisional, have a positive effect on peri-implant bone stability.
format Article
id doaj-art-ab67ea0e151044ee9dc8fdf3bdd8a7d7
institution DOAJ
issn 2079-4983
language English
publishDate 2025-03-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Journal of Functional Biomaterials
spelling doaj-art-ab67ea0e151044ee9dc8fdf3bdd8a7d72025-08-20T02:42:31ZengMDPI AGJournal of Functional Biomaterials2079-49832025-03-011639310.3390/jfb16030093Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling ConceptMilan Stoilov0Joerg Winterhoff1Lea Stoilov2Anastasia Timoschenko3Helmut Stark4Florian Heuser5Michael Marder6Dominik Kraus7Norbert Enkling8Department of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, SwitzerlandDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, GermanyDepartment of Prosthodontics, Preclinical Education and Dental Materials Science, University Hospital Bonn, 53111 Bonn, Germany(1) Background: Early-stage bone resorption following implant placement can significantly impact the long-term success of implants. This study evaluates whether a fully digitally planned implant position based on the E-point concept, along with guided profiling of the supracrestal complex, contributes to improved stability of peri-implant bone levels. (2) Methods: 29 implants were placed in 27 patients utilizing both immediate (Group 1; n = 19) and delayed placement (Group 2; n = 10) protocols. Implant position and emergence profile were preoperatively determined and consistently executed through guided surgery and CAD/CAM-fabricated restorations. Due to the subcrestal positioning of the implant, a corresponding bone profiler with a guide pin was used to shape the emergence profile and prevent the provisional restoration from impinging on the proximal bone. Provisional restorations were immediately placed to support the emergence profile. Bone level changes were documented radiographically over a two-year period. The first Bone-to-Implant Contact Level (∆ fBIC), change in highest approximal Bone Level (∆ haBL), and formation of an emergence profile width (WEP) were measured. (3) Results: All implants and restorations survived after two years, no significant change in first Bone-to-Implant Contact Level (∆ fBIC = 0 ± 0.02 mm), no change in highest approximal Bone Level (∆ haBL) of −0.23 mm ± 0.71 mm, and formation of an emergence profile width (WEP) averaging 0.18 ± 0.19 mm. (4) Conclusions: Despite the initial stress on the bone caused by bone profiling, guided implant placement and bone shaping, supported by an immediate provisional, have a positive effect on peri-implant bone stability.https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4983/16/3/93bone remodelingemergence profileimplant successimmediate implantlate implantimmediate restoration
spellingShingle Milan Stoilov
Joerg Winterhoff
Lea Stoilov
Anastasia Timoschenko
Helmut Stark
Florian Heuser
Michael Marder
Dominik Kraus
Norbert Enkling
Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
Journal of Functional Biomaterials
bone remodeling
emergence profile
implant success
immediate implant
late implant
immediate restoration
title Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
title_full Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
title_fullStr Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
title_full_unstemmed Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
title_short Intraoperative Profiling of the Supracrestal Implant Complex Minimizes Peri-Implant Crestal Bone Remodeling: The Guided Bone Profiling Concept
title_sort intraoperative profiling of the supracrestal implant complex minimizes peri implant crestal bone remodeling the guided bone profiling concept
topic bone remodeling
emergence profile
implant success
immediate implant
late implant
immediate restoration
url https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4983/16/3/93
work_keys_str_mv AT milanstoilov intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT joergwinterhoff intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT leastoilov intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT anastasiatimoschenko intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT helmutstark intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT florianheuser intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT michaelmarder intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT dominikkraus intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept
AT norbertenkling intraoperativeprofilingofthesupracrestalimplantcomplexminimizesperiimplantcrestalboneremodelingtheguidedboneprofilingconcept