Literature DB >> 15214224

Retrospective analysis of implant survival and the influence of periodontal disease and immediate placement on long-term results.

Cyril I Evian1, Robert Emling, Edwin S Rosenberg, Jonathan A Waasdorp, Wendy Halpern, Shalin Shah, Marela Garcia.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the cumulative survival rates of dental implants placed in a private periodontal practice and the effects of periodontal disease and immediate placement on implant survival.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 149 consecutive patients. Each patient had a single implant placed. For the purpose of analysis, patients were divided into 2 groups: those who were periodontally healthy and those who had periodontal disease. Implants were placed into available bone either immediately or after a healing period. All failed implants were removed and recorded. The effects of periodontal status and placement time on implant survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression and log-rank tests.
RESULTS: Of the 149 implants in the study, 22 failed during the observation period. The 127 censored cases (i.e., implants that had not failed at the end of the observational period) were observed for a mean of 943 days (SD 932, range 35 to 4,030). Failed implants were observed for a mean of 722 days (SD 1,026, range 18 to 3,548). The presence of periodontal disease appeared to be associated with a greater failure rate, but there was no observed effect associated with time of placement. The percentages of censored immediate placement cases and delayed placement cases were nearly identical. Among the 77 implants associated with periodontal disease, placement time was not strongly associated with percentage censored. Forty-three of the 55 immediately placed implants (78.18%) and 18 of the 22 implants (81.18%) whose placement was delayed were censored. Both Cox proportional hazards regression and log-rank tests established that survival was adversely affected by periodontal disease (P < .05) but unaffected by time of placement (P > .50). The lower 1-sided 95% confidence limit for median survival time was 3,548 days for patients without periodontal disease and 1,799 days for patients with disease. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSION: Implant survival was compromised by a history of periodontitis but not affected by immediate or delayed placement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15214224

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  9 in total

1.  Immediate loading of implants in the aesthetic zone: comparison between two placement timings.

Authors:  Fabrizio Carini; Salvatore Longoni; Valeria Pisapia; Manuel Francesconi; Vito Saggese; Gianluca Porcaro
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2014-10-25

2.  Relationship between indication for tooth extraction and outcome of immediate implants: A retrospective study with 5 years of follow-up.

Authors:  Beatriz Tarazona; Pablo Tarazona-Álvarez; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Maria Peñarrocha-Diago
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2014-10-01

3.  Prognosis following dental implant treatment under general anesthesia in patients with special needs.

Authors:  Il-Hyung Kim; Tae Seong Kuk; Sang Yoon Park; Yong-Suk Choi; Hyun Jeong Kim; Kwang-Suk Seo
Journal:  J Dent Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2017-09-25

4.  Retrospective study of alveolar ridge preservation compared with no alveolar ridge preservation in periodontally compromised extraction sockets.

Authors:  Jungwon Lee; Junseob Yun; Jung-Ju Kim; Ki-Tae Koo; Yang-Jo Seol; Yong-Moo Lee
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-03-26

5.  Long-term results of immediate implantation in the maxillary molar area with simultaneous sinus floor elevation by the crestal approach and early loading protocol: A retrospective case series follow-up study.

Authors:  Nader Ayubian Markazi; Nasrin Akhondi; Mostafa Montazeri
Journal:  J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent       Date:  2018-12-25

6.  Supportive periodontal therapy and periodontal biotype as prognostic factors in implants placed in patients with a history of periodontitis.

Authors:  Luis-Antonio Aguirre-Zorzano; Francisco-Javier Vallejo-Aisa; Ruth Estefanía-Fresco
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2013-09-01

Review 7.  Immediate implants placed in fresh sockets associated to periapical infectious processes. A systematic review.

Authors:  Juan-Carlos Álvarez-Camino; Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón; Cosme Gay-Escoda
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2013-09-01

8.  A clinical and radiographical comparison of buccolingual crestal bone changes after immediate and delayed implant placement.

Authors:  Viraj Amin; Santosh Kumar; Surabhi Joshi; Tanvi Hirani; Deepak Shishoo
Journal:  Med Pharm Rep       Date:  2019-10-25

Review 9.  Dental Implants Inserted in Fresh Extraction Sockets versus Healed Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Adam Ibrahim; Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 3.623

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.