The study was conducted to evaluate the effect of increased crown-to-implant

ratio clinico-radiographically. A total of 15 implants were placed in selected patients for

the present study. The site selection for implant placement was done randomly following
the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The implant system used for the study was Natea
(Euroteknika) implants. All the patients who were enrolled in the study reported for
scheduled maintenance and post-operative evaluation visits. The clinical parameters
evaluated were plaque index, gingival index, probing depth, bleeding on probing,
mobility and loosening or fracture of abutments. The radiographic parameters evaluated
were periapical radiolucency, crestal bone loss (mesial) and crestal bone loss (distal).

All the implants were loaded 3 months after placement. The above mentioned
parameters were evaluated at 1month, 3 and 6 months post-loading. The statistical
analysis was performed using the paired student t-test.

The results of the study were as follows:

Radiographic assessment:

The crestal bone loss was observed on the mesial and distal side of the implants.
The mean crestal bone loss (mesial) at 1 month was 0.26 ± 0.20 whereas mean values
after 3 months and 6 months post operatively were 0.39 ± 0.16 and 0.49 ± 0.18
respectively (p<0.001). Table 1 and Graph 1 shows the mean value of Crestal Bone
Loss on the mesial side of the implant. The mean crestal bone loss (distal) at 1 month
was 0.31 ± 0.15 whereas mean values after 3 months and 6 months post operatively were
0.41 ± 0.13 and 0.55 ± 0.19 respectively . Table 2 and Graph 2 shows the mean value of
Crestal Bone Loss on the distal side of the implant . The bone loss found was significant
but the values were within the criteria of success of implants.

Table 3 and Graph 3 shows the percentage number of implants that showed
periapical radiolucency around the implants. No periapical radiolucency was observed
around any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.
Clinical Assessment:

Table 4 and Graph 4 shows the percentage number of implants that showed
loosening or fracture of abutment. No loosening or fracture of abutment was observed in
any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.

Table 5 and Graph 5 shows the mean value of plaque index. The mean plaque
index at 1 month was 0.48 ± 0.22 whereas the mean values after 3 months and 6 months
post operatively were 0.53 ± 0.25 and 0.58 ± 0.26 respectively .

Table 6 and Graph 6 shows the mean value of gingival index. The mean
gingival index at 1 month was 0.15 ± 0.16 whereas the mean values after 3 months and 6
months post operatively were 0.05 ± 0.10 and 0.03 ± 0.09 respectively .

Table 7 and Graph 7 shows the bleeding on probing assessment. Around 20% of
the implants showed bleeding on probing after 1 month. But on 3 month and 6 month
evaluation no bleeding on probing was recorded.

Table 8 and Graph 8 shows the mean value of probing depth assessed around the
implants. The mean pocket depth at 1 month was 1.35 ± 0.74 whereas mean values after
3 months and 6 months post operatively were 1.35 ± 0.55 and 1.15 ± 0.51.

Table 9 and Graph 9 shows the percentage of number of implants that exhibited
mobility. No mobility was observed in any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.
Table 1: Represents the mean value of crestal bone loss -mesial

Std.
N Mean Deviation p-value
CBLM1 15 0.26 0.20 <0.001**
CBLM3 15 0.39 0.16 <0.001**
CBLM6 15 0.49 0.18 <0.001**

Table 1 and Graph 1 shows the mean value of Crestal Bone Loss on the mesial
side of the implant. The mean crestal bone loss (mesial) at 1 month was 0.26 ± 0.20
whereas mean values after 3 months and 6 months post operatively were 0.39 ± 0.16 and
0.49 ± 0.18 respectively.

Graph 1: Represents the mean value of Crestal Bone Loss- Mesial

0.49
0.50
0.45 0.39
0.40
0.35
0.30 0.26
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05 0.00
0.00
CBLD0 CBLM1 CBLM3 CBLM6
Table 2: Represents the mean value of crestal bone loss -distal

Std.
N Mean Deviation p-value
CBLD1 15 0.31 0.15 <0.001**
CBLD3 15 0.41 0.13 <0.001**
CBLD6 15 0.55 0.19 <0.001**

Table 2 and Graph 2 shows the mean value of Crestal Bone Loss on the distal
side of the implant . The mean crestal bone loss (distal) at 1 month was 0.31 ± 0.15
whereas mean values after 3 months and 6 months post operatively were 0.41 ± 0.13 and
0.55 ± 0.19 respectively.

Graph 2: Represents the mean value of Crestal Bone Loss- Distal

0.60 0.55

0.50
0.41
0.40
0.31
0.30

0.20

0.10
0.00
0.00
CBLD0 CBLD1 CBLD3 CBLD6
Table 3: Represents the mean percentage of Periapical Radiolucency

Implants Showing Periapical

Radiolucency

1 MONTH 0

3 MONTHS 0

6 MONTHS 0

Table 3 and Graph 3 shows the periapical radiolucency around the implants. No
periapical radiolucency was observed around any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.

Graph 3: Represents the mean percentage of periapical radiolucency

15 15 15 15
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 0 0 0 0
0
PR Base PR 1m PR 3m PR 6m

No Yes
Table 4: Represemts the mean percentage of Loosening and Fracture of Abutment.

Loosening of Abutment Fracture of Abutment

1 MONTH 0 0

3 MONTHS 0 0

6 MONTHS 0 0

Table 4 and Graph 4 shows the loosening and fracture of abutment. No loosening
or fracture of abutment was observed in any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.

Graph 4:Represents the mean percentage of loosening and fracture of abutment

15 15
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 0 0
0
Loosening of Abutment Fracture of Abutment

No Yes
Table 5: Represemts the mean value of plaque index

Std.
N Mean Deviation t-value p-value
PI1 15 0.48 0.22 8.473 <0.001**
PI3 15 0.53 0.25 8.342 <0.001**
PI6 15 0.58 0.26 8.635 <0.001**

Table 5and Graph5 shows the mean value of plaque index. The mean plaque
index at 1 month was 0.48 ± 0.22 whereas the mean values after 3 months and 6 months
post operatively were 0.53 ± 0.25 and 0.58 ± 0.26 respectively. The results

Graph 5: Represents the mean plaque index

0.58
0.60 0.53
0.48
0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10
0.00
0.00
PI0 PI1 PI3 PI6
Table 6: Represents the mean value of gingival index

Std.
N Mean Deviation t-value p-value
GI1 15 0.15 0.16 3.674 0.003**
GI3 15 0.05 0.10 1.871 0.082
GI6 15 0.03 0.09 1.468 0.164

Table 6 and Graph 6 shows the mean value of gingival index. The mean gingival
index at 1 month was 0.15 ± 0.16 whereas the mean values after 3 months and 6 months
post operatively were 0.05 ± 0.10 and 0.03 ± 0.09 respectively.

Graph 6: Represents the mean gingival index

0.15
0.16

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.08
0.05
0.06
0.03
0.04

0.02
0.00
0.00
GI0 GI1 GI3 GI6
Table 7: Represemts the mean value of implants showing Bleeding on Probing

Implants Showing Bleeding

on Probing

1 MONTH 20%

3 MONTHS 0

6 MONTHS 0

Table 7 and Graph 7 show the bleeding on probing. 20% of the patients exhibited
mean bleeding on probing after 1 month. But after 3 months and 6 months examination
no bleeding on probing was recorded.

Graph 7: Represents the mean percentage of bleeding on probing

15 15 15
16
14 12
12
10
8
6
3
4
2 0 0 0
0
BoP Base BoP1m BoP3m BoP6m

No Yes
Table 8: Represents the Comparison of mean value of probing depth

p-value

1 MONTH 1.35 ± 0.74 0.15

3 MONTHS 1.35 ± 0.55 0.02

6 MONTHS 1.15 ± 0.51 0

Graph 8: Represents the Graph showing mean probing depth

0.6
0.575
0.6 0.525

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1
0
0
PI_base PI_1m PI_3m PI_6m

Table 8 and Graph 8 shows the comparison of mean value of probing depth. The mean
pocket depth at 1 month was 1.35 ± 0.74 whereas mean values after 3 months and 6
months post operatively were 1.35 ± 0.55 and 1.15 ± 0.51.

Table 9: Represents the mean value of implants showing mobility

 Percentage of Implants
Showing Mobility

1 MONTH 0

3 MONTHS 0

6 MONTHS 0

Table 9 and Graph 9 show the percentage of mobility of implants. No mobility

was observed in any of the implants after 1, 3 and 6 months.

Graph 9: Represents the mean value of implants showing percentage of mobility

15 15 15 15
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2 0 0 0 0
0
Mob Base Mob 1m Mob 3m Mob 6m

No Yes