이 연구의 목적은 임상적으로 사용되는 RBM과 산부식 임플란트의 3년 생존율을 비교, 분석하기 위한 것이다. 총 152개의 RBM 임플란트를 식립하였고, 이 중 1개의 임플란트에서 실패가 발생하였는데, 원인은 식립체의 파절이었다. 또한 총 152개의 산부식 표면 임플란트를 식립하였는데, 이 중 7개의 임플란트에서 실패를 하였으며, 원인으로는 과열, 감염, 초기고정 불량 등이었다. RBM 임플란트의 생존율은 99.34%, 산부식 임플란트의 생존율은 95.39%로 두 가지 임플란트 모두 양호한 생존율을 보였으나, RBM 임플란트에서 다소 높은 생존율을 나타내었다.
The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare survival rates of resorbable blast media(RBM) surface and acid-etched surface implants being usually used in clinics. RBM surface implants (USII, Osstem, Busan, Korea) or acid-etched surface implants ($Osseotite^{(R)}$, Biomet $3i^{[TM]}$, FL, USA) were placed in edentulous area of 140 patients between January of 2005 and March of 2007. The number of implants was 304, and 152 out of them were RBM surface implants while another 152 were acid-etched surface implants. According to the evaluation items, the survey was performed before and after the implants installations. The 3-year survival rates of both kind of implants were calculated. 1. Total of 152 RBM surface implants were placed. Among them, one implant was failed, which was implanted in the posterior mandible with D2 bone quality. The failure was resulted from fracture of the fixture. Others showed good results and survival rate of RBM surface implant was 99.34%. 2. Total of 152 acid-etched surface implants were placed. Seven implants of them were failed, thus, survival rate was 95.39%. The causes of the failures were considered as infection, overheat and the lack of initial stability. In this research, both implants showed good 3-year survival rate, although RMB surface implant represented a better result.
