Literature DB >> 14613081

Dental implants in reconstructed jaws: implant longevity and peri-implant tissue outcomes.

Lim K Cheung1, Albert C F Leung.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The study aimed to evaluate the clinical status and survival of dental implants inserted in reconstructed jaws, with particular reference to the peri-implant tissues.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a clinical follow-up study based on 29 rehabilitated patients after oral tumor surgery, who received autogenous bone grafts from the ilium and endosseous implants (14 maxillary and 15 mandibular cases; 140 implants) for functional jaw reconstruction between 1988 and 1999. Clinical records of the patients were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical parameters of plaque index, probing pocket depth, and bleeding on probing were assessed around the implants and control teeth at 4 locations (mesiobuccal, distobuccal, mesiolingual, and distolingual). Implant mobility was assessed clinically and objectively using a Periotest (Gulden; Siemens, Bensheim, Germany) equipment for those implants supporting removable prostheses. Radiographically, the proportion of implant length remained osseointegrated was measured.
RESULTS: With a mean follow-up time of 50 months, 90.7% of the 140 implants placed were functional in supporting dental prostheses; 4.3% of implants failed in osseointegration and the remaining 5.0% implants were osseointegrated but nonfunctional. A total of 493 sites of 127 functional implants and 392 sites of 98 control teeth were assessed. No significant difference was found between the implants and control teeth parameters, except on the probing pocket depth. The mean peri-implant probing depth was 3.5 mm, and 52.7% of the measured sites were 3 mm or less. More than one third of the implants (35.9%) presented with increased probing depth (> or =4 mm), and this was significantly higher than in the control teeth (P <.001, chi(2) test). Bleeding on probing was found in 19.3% of the measured peri-implant sites, corresponding to 42.2% of the dental implants. Of the implants, 28.9% were completely free from plaque and 9.4% show visible plaque accumulation. Mobility assessment was feasible on 32 implants and no mobility was detected. Radiographically, the mean implant length remained in bone was 81.1%, with 82.6% in the maxilla and 79.4% in the mandible. Implant survival rate calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method was 86.9% for 5 years. Based on the defined criteria, the success rate of implants placed in reconstructed jaws in this study was 90.7%.
CONCLUSION: Endosseous implants can be successfully placed in reconstructed jaws for oral rehabilitation with maintenance of reasonable health status of the peri-implant tissues in the long-term.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14613081     DOI: 10.1016/s0278-2391(03)00726-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  10 in total

1.  Sub-Periosteal Dissection with Denture-Guided Epithelial Regeneration: A Novel Method for Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Management in Reconstructed Mandibles.

Authors:  Vinay V Kumar; P C Jacob; Moni A Kuriakose
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2015-11-23

2.  Masticatory rehabilitation following upper and lower jaw reconstruction using vascularised free fibula flap and enossal implants-19 years of experience with a comprehensive concept.

Authors:  Samer George Hakim; Harald Kimmerle; Thomas Trenkle; Peter Sieg; Hans-Christian Jacobsen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors-a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Karina Zierden; Juliane Wöstmann; Bernd Wöstmann; Peter Rehmann
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 3.606

4.  Implants coated with bioactive glass by CO2-laser, an in vivo study.

Authors:  N Moritz; S Rossi; E Vedel; T Tirri; H Ylänen; H Aro; T Närhi
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  Free flap transfer in cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a review of the current data.

Authors:  M Thorwarth; C Eulzer; R Bader; C Wolf; M Schmidt; S Schultze-Mosgau
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2008-09

6.  Comparison of the success rate of endodontic treatment and implant treatment.

Authors:  Ranya Faraj Elemam; Iain Pretty
Journal:  ISRN Dent       Date:  2011-06-15

7.  A bar and ball attachment prosthesis over osseointegrated implants post mandibular resection.

Authors:  Sharad Gupta; Akshay Bhargava; Praful Mehra
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

8.  Indications of Free Grafts in Mandibular Reconstruction, after Removing Benign Tumors: Treatment Algorithm.

Authors:  Rodrigo Fariña; Juan Pablo Alister; Francisca Uribe; Sergio Olate; Alvaro Arriagada
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2016-08-15

9.  Prosthetic rehabilitation of maxillary and mandibular gunshot defects with fixed basal implant-supported prostheses: A 5-year follow-up case report.

Authors:  Fadia Awadalkreem; Nadia Khalifa; Abdelnasir G Ahmad; Ahmed Mohamed Suliman; Motaz Osman
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2020-02-19

10.  Delayed Reconstruction of Palatomaxillary Defect Using Fibula Free Flap.

Authors:  Soo-Hwan Byun; Ho-Kyung Lim; Byoung-Eun Yang; Soung-Min Kim; Jong-Ho Lee
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 4.241

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.