B Friberg1, A Ekestubbe, D Mellström, L Sennerby. 1. Brånemark Clinic, Public Dental Health Service and Faculty of Odontology, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden. bertil.friberg@vgregion.se
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral implant treatment on patients with poor jaw-bone texture has shown increased failure rates in series of studies. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively follow patients with osteoporosis of the axial or appendicular skeleton, including the jaw bone, being subjected to oral implant treatment. The outcome of inserted implants, when using an adapted bone site preparation technique and extended healing periods, was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on data obtained from preoperative radiographs, patient medical history, and resistance of the jaw bone perceived during drilling, 14 of 16 patients were referred to the Osteoporosis Laboratory, Sahlgren University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden, for bone density measurements. Two patients already had an established diagnosis of osteoporosis. Fourteen jaws in 13 patients (11 females, 2 males; mean age: 68 yr) were subsequently subjected to oral implant treatment with a total of 70 implants (Brånemark System) of various designs. The mean follow-up period was 3 years and 4 months (range: 6 mo-11 yr). RESULTS: Osteoporosis of either the spine, the hip, or both regions was diagnosed in 14 patients, and osteopenia was diagnosed in 2 patients. Two implants failed, and the overall implant survival rate at the end of the study period was 97.0% for maxillae and 97.3% for mandibles. The marginal bone resorption at the 1-year follow-up concurs with the outcome of other studies, irrespective of the preoperative bone texture present. CONCLUSION: The outcome of the present study showed that implant placement in patients in whom the average bone density showed osteoporosis in both lumbar spine and hip as well as poor local bone texture may be successful over a period of many years.
BACKGROUND: Oral implant treatment on patients with poor jaw-bone texture has shown increased failure rates in series of studies. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively follow patients with osteoporosis of the axial or appendicular skeleton, including the jaw bone, being subjected to oral implant treatment. The outcome of inserted implants, when using an adapted bone site preparation technique and extended healing periods, was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on data obtained from preoperative radiographs, patient medical history, and resistance of the jaw bone perceived during drilling, 14 of 16 patients were referred to the Osteoporosis Laboratory, Sahlgren University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden, for bone density measurements. Two patients already had an established diagnosis of osteoporosis. Fourteen jaws in 13 patients (11 females, 2 males; mean age: 68 yr) were subsequently subjected to oral implant treatment with a total of 70 implants (Brånemark System) of various designs. The mean follow-up period was 3 years and 4 months (range: 6 mo-11 yr). RESULTS:Osteoporosis of either the spine, the hip, or both regions was diagnosed in 14 patients, and osteopenia was diagnosed in 2 patients. Two implants failed, and the overall implant survival rate at the end of the study period was 97.0% for maxillae and 97.3% for mandibles. The marginal bone resorption at the 1-year follow-up concurs with the outcome of other studies, irrespective of the preoperative bone texture present. CONCLUSION: The outcome of the present study showed that implant placement in patients in whom the average bone density showed osteoporosis in both lumbar spine and hip as well as poor local bone texture may be successful over a period of many years.