RESUMEN
The aim of this experimental animal study was to assess guided bone regeneration (GBR) and implant stability (ISQ) around two dental implants with different macrogeometries. Forty eight dental implants were placed within six Beagle dogs. The implants were divided into two groups (n = 24 per group): G1 group implants presented semi-conical macrogeometry, a low apical self-tapping portion, and an external hexagonal connection (whereby the cervical portion was bigger than the implant body). G2 group implants presented parallel walls macrogeometry, a strong apical self-tapping portion, and an external hexagonal connection (with the cervical portion parallel to the implant body). Buccal (mouth-related) defects of 2 mm (c2 condition) and 5 mm (c3 condition) were created. For the control condition with no defect (c1), implants were installed at crestal bone level. Eight implants in each group were installed under each condition. The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was measured immediately after implant placement, and on the day of sacrifice (3 months after the implant placement). Histological and histomorphometric procedures and analysis were performed to assess all samples, measuring crestal bone loss (CBL) and bone-to-implant contact (BIC). The data obtained were compared with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The ISQ results showed a similar evolution between the groups at the two evaluation times, although higher values were found in the G1 group under all conditions. Within the limitations of this animal study, it may be concluded that implant macrogeometry is an important factor influencing guided bone regeneration in buccal defects. Group G1 showed better buccal bone regeneration (CBL) and BIC % at 3 months follow up, also parallel collar design can stimulate bone regeneration more than divergent collar design implants. The apical portion of the implant, with a stronger self-tapping feature, may provide better initial stability, even in the presence of a bone defect in the buccal area.
RESUMEN
La elongación de la apófisis estiloides afecta hasta a un 28% de la población, pero no siempre con sintomatología asociada. La clasificación expuesta en este artículo aleja a esta patología del concepto clásico de Síndrome de Eagle como único término, se valorará el síndrome estiloideo, síndrome estilo-carotideo, síndrome pseudoestiloideo. Su etiología ha sido pobremente estudiada, desde su relación amigdalectomía-síndrome de Eagle, se expondrán otras posibilidades como la causa genética, aportando tres casos clínicos en una misma familia sin cirugía previa o traumatismos asociados (AU)
The elongation of the styloid process is a common disease, affecting up to 28% of the population, not always with associated symptoms. In this article the different classifications of this condition are exposed, instead of Eagle syndrome as a single term, will be discuss the styloid syndrome, carotid-Styloid, pseudo-styloid syndrome and the Eagle syndrome. The etiology has been poorly studied, since their relationship between tonsillectomy and eagle syndrome. however the possibility of a genetic cause will be discussed by three cases with this disorder in the same family, without any surgery nor traumatism associated (AU)