OBJECTIVES: The aims of this prospective study were to assess the treatment outcome of immediately loaded full-arch fixed bridges anchored to both tilted and axially placed implants for the rehabilitation of fully edentulous maxillae and to compare the outcome of axial vs. tilted implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with edentulous maxillae were included in the study. Each patient received a full-arch fixed bridge supported by four axial implants and two distal tilted implants. Loading was applied within 48 h from surgery. Patients were scheduled for follow-up at 6 months, 1 year and annually up to 5 years. Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone-level change was performed at 1 year. RESULTS: One patient died 4 months after surgery. Thirty patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year (range 3-42 months, mean 22.1 months). Three failures were recorded at 1-year follow-up (two axial implants and one tilted). Two more implants (one tilted and one axially placed) were lost within 18 months of loading. The 1-year implant survival rate was 98.8% for both axial and tilted implants. Prosthesis success rate was 100% at 1 year. Marginal bone loss around axial and tilted implants at 12-month evaluation was similar, being, respectively, 0.9+/-0.4 (standard deviation) mm and 0.8+/-0.5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The present preliminary data suggest that immediate loading associated with tilted implants could be considered to be a viable treatment modality for the atrophic maxilla and that there does not seem to be a different clinical outcome between tilted and axial implants.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this prospective study were to assess the treatment outcome of immediately loaded full-arch fixed bridges anchored to both tilted and axially placed implants for the rehabilitation of fully edentulous maxillae and to compare the outcome of axial vs. tilted implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with edentulous maxillae were included in the study. Each patient received a full-arch fixed bridge supported by four axial implants and two distal tilted implants. Loading was applied within 48 h from surgery. Patients were scheduled for follow-up at 6 months, 1 year and annually up to 5 years. Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone-level change was performed at 1 year. RESULTS: One patient died 4 months after surgery. Thirty patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year (range 3-42 months, mean 22.1 months). Three failures were recorded at 1-year follow-up (two axial implants and one tilted). Two more implants (one tilted and one axially placed) were lost within 18 months of loading. The 1-year implant survival rate was 98.8% for both axial and tilted implants. Prosthesis success rate was 100% at 1 year. Marginal bone loss around axial and tilted implants at 12-month evaluation was similar, being, respectively, 0.9+/-0.4 (standard deviation) mm and 0.8+/-0.5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The present preliminary data suggest that immediate loading associated with tilted implants could be considered to be a viable treatment modality for the atrophic maxilla and that there does not seem to be a different clinical outcome between tilted and axial implants.
Authors: Árpád László Szabó; Ádám László Nagy; Csaba Lászlófy; Márió Gajdács; Péter Bencsik; Krisztina Kárpáti; Zoltán Baráth Journal: Dent J (Basel) Date: 2022-05-11
Authors: Eugenia Candel-Marti; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Leticia Bagán; Maria Peñarrocha-Diago; Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2015-05-01
Authors: Jose Luis Calvo Guirado; Aldo Fabian Lucero-Sánchez; Ana Boquete Castro; Marcus Abboud; Sergio Gehrke; Manuel Fernández Dominguez; Rafael Arcesio Delgado Ruiz Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 3.623
Authors: Antoine N Berberi; Joseph M Sabbagh; Moustafa N Aboushelib; Ziad F Noujeim; Ziad A Salameh Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 4.566