Literature DB >> 15877753

Technical and biological complications/failures with single crowns and fixed partial dentures on implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study.

Urs Brägger1, Ioannis Karoussis, Rutger Persson, Bjarni Pjetursson, Giovanni Salvi, Niklausp Lang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess prospectively over 10 years the incidences of technical and/or biological complications and failures occurring in a cohort of consecutive partially edentulous patients with fixed reconstructions on implants of the ITI Dental Implant System.
METHODS: Eighty-nine patients were available, 34 (38.2%) were male, 55 (61.8%) were female. At the 10-year examination (range 8-12 years), they were 58.9 years old (range 28-88 years).
RESULTS: Single crowns (SC): 48 patients had been restored with 69 SC on 69 implants. Five of the implants with the crowns were lost because of biological failures. Two crowns (2.9%) were remade because of technical failures. Total failure amounted to seven (10%). Implant borne fixed partial dentures (I-I FPD): In 29 patients who had been restored with 33 implant borne suprastructures, the total number of failed I-I FPD was 2 (6.1%). Tooth-implant borne fixed partial dentures (I-T FPD): In 21 patients, 22 mixed tooth-implant borne reconstructions were constructed. The number of failed FPD reached 7 (31.8%). Statistically significantly fewer biological failures occurred with I-I FPD compared with the I-T FPDs (ANOVA, Bonferroni, P=0.022). The I-T FPDs experienced statistically significantly more frequent technical failures compared with the other two groups of suprastructures (P=0.003, 0.031). Consequences of complications: The occurrence of loss of retention as a complication increased the odds ratio (OR) to 17.6 (P<0.001) to end up in a technical failure. Similarly, the event of a porcelain fracture increased the OR for the suprastructure to be a failure at 10 years to 11.0 (P< or =0.004). Treatment of periimplantitis increased the OR to 5.44 (P< or =0.011) to result in a biological failure compared with implants in which this type of treatment was not applied.
CONCLUSION: The three groups of suprastructures demonstrated marked differences in their patterns of failures and complications. Complications increased the risk for failure. Support by CRF, University of Berne, Switzerland.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15877753     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01105.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  14 in total

Review 1.  Factors affecting the complexity of dental implant restoration - what is the current evidence and guidance?

Authors:  S P Wright; J Hayden; J A Lynd; K Walker-Finch; J Willett; C Ucer; S D Speechley
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.626

Review 2.  How frequent does peri-implantitis occur? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mia Rakic; Pablo Galindo-Moreno; Alberto Monje; Sandro Radovanovic; Hom-Lay Wang; David Cochran; Anton Sculean; Luigi Canullo
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Frequency of Dental Implants Placed in the Esthetic Zone in Dental Clinic of Tehran University: A Descriptive Study.

Authors:  Amir Alireza Rasouli Ghahroudi; Ali Homayouni; Amir Reza Rokn; Fatemeh Kia; Mohammad Javad Kharazifard; Afshin Khorsand
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2015-12

Review 4.  Morse taper dental implants and platform switching: The new paradigm in oral implantology.

Authors:  José Paulo Macedo; Jorge Pereira; Brendan R Vahey; Bruno Henriques; Cesar A M Benfatti; Ricardo S Magini; José López-López; Júlio C M Souza
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar

Review 5.  Implant Supported Fixed Restorations versus Implant Supported Removable Overdentures: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Khaled Selim; Sherif Ali; Ahmed Reda
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2016-10-14

Review 6.  The Overall Survival, Complication-Free Survival, and Related Complications of Combined Tooth-Implant Fixed Partial Dentures: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Peter Borg; James Puryer; Lisa McNally; Dominic O'Sullivan
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2016-05-25

Review 7.  Combined Implant and Tooth Support: An Up-to-Date Comprehensive Overview.

Authors:  Mahmoud K Al-Omiri; Maher Al-Masri; Mohannad M Alhijawi; Edward Lynch
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2017-03-23

8.  A New Classification for the Relationship between Periodontal, Periapical, and Peri-implant Complications.

Authors:  Mahdi Kadkhodazadeh; Reza Amid
Journal:  Iran Endod J       Date:  2013-08-01

9.  Evaluation of removal forces of implant-supported zirconia copings depending on abutment geometry, luting agent and cleaning method during re-cementation.

Authors:  Matthias Rödiger; Sven Rinke; Fenja Ehret-Kleinau; Franziska Pohlmeyer; Katharina Lange; Ralf Bürgers; Nikolaus Gersdorff
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 1.904

10.  Findings of a Four-Year Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Two-Piece and One-Piece Zirconia Abutments Supporting Single Prosthetic Restorations in Maxillary Anterior Region.

Authors:  Guerino Paolantoni; Gaetano Marenzi; Andrea Blasi; Jolanda Mignogna; Gilberto Sammartino
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.