Background: The survival rate of oral implants in soft-quality bone has been demonstrated to be inferior to that of implants inserted in good-quality bone. A possible way to increase the survival rate in soft-quality bone may be to use a tapered implant. Such an implant has been developed and manufactured by Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden. So far, there have been only a few publications regarding this implant.
Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the outcome of using the tapered Brånemark System Mark IV fixture with the outcome of using earlier Brånemark fixtures in a controlled prospective study.
Materials and methods: The study was performed as a multicenter study including seven specialist centers. The material consisted of 40 patients in need of implant-supported bridges in the maxilla. Twenty-five patients belonged to the test group, in which the tapered Mark IV implants were inserted, and 15 patients belonged to the control group, in which Brånemark Standard or Mark II implants were used. The patients were allocated to the test group or the control group according to randomization schedules. The implants were inserted according to the guidelines for Brånemark implants. A two-stage surgical protocol was used, and abutment connection was made 6 months after fixture insertion. The test group comprised 97 Mark IV implants, and the control group made up 92 implants. The prosthetic procedure followed the guidelines for Brånemark implants, and all patients were provided with full fixed maxillary bridges. The patients were followed up with clinical and radiographic records for 1 year after loading.
Results: The survival rate was 96.9% for the Mark IV implants and 98.9% for the control implants. There was no significant difference between the two groups. There was a mean marginal bone loss of 0.2 mm during the observation period, and there was no difference between test implants and control implants.
Conclusions: With regard to survival rate and marginal bone level changes, no differences could be demonstrated between the Mark IV tapered implant and the Brånemark implants used earlier. However, compared with earlier results of Brånemark implants in soft-quality bone, the Mark IV implant demonstrated an improved survival rate.