Literature DB >> 19014161

Effect of osteoporotic status on the survival of titanium dental implants.

Christopher M Holahan1, Sreenivas Koka, Kurt A Kennel, Amy L Weaver, Daniel A Assad, Frederick J Regennitter, Deepak Kademani.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether a diagnosis of osteoporosis affected the survival rate of osseointegrated dental implants. Other variables that were studied were age, arch location of the implant, and smoking status on the effect of dental implant survival.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was completed on all women who were 50 years of age or older at the time of dental implant placement at the Mayo Clinic between October 1, 1983, and December 31, 2004. Osteoporotic status was defined on the basis of bone mineral density (BMD) score utilizing World Health Organization criteria. Univariate analyses were performed to evaluate the following independent variables' effect on implant survival: BMD T-score, age, osteoporosis status, arch location of the implant, and smoking status at the time of implant placement.
RESULTS: A total of 3,224 implants in 746 female patients 50 years of age or older at the time of implant placement were evaluated. BMD scores within 3 years of implant placement were available for 646 implants (192 patients). In this group, 37 implant failures were noted. The 5-year implant survival rate was 93.8% in the group of patients with BMD scores. In this group of 192 patients, there were 94 (49%) who were not diagnosed with osteopenia or osteoporosis, 57 (29.7%) with a diagnosis of osteopenia, and 41 (21.4%) with a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Patients with a diagnosis of osteoporosis or osteopenia were not significantly more likely to develop implant failure compared to those without such a diagnosis (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.50 to 0.60, P = .76 and HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.40 to 2.42, P = .97, respectively). Arch location and BMD score did not have a statistically significant effect on implant survival rates. The only tested variable to demonstrate a significant effect was smoking. Implants in patients who were smokers during the time of implant placement were 2.6 times more likely to fail compared to implants placed in patients who did not smoke (HR = 2.6, 95% CI = 1.20 to 5.63; P = .016).
CONCLUSIONS: Based upon the data derived from this retrospective study of 192 women at least 50 years of age at the time of implant placement, the following observations were made: (1) a diagnosis of osteoporosis and osteopenia did not contribute to increased risk of implant failure and (2) implants placed in patients who were smokers at the time of implant placement were 2.6 times more likely to fail than implants placed in nonsmokers. Based on these data, a diagnosis of osteoporosis or osteopenia is not a contraindication to dental implant therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19014161

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


  16 in total

1.  Bone regeneration in dentistry.

Authors:  Paolo Tonelli; Marco Duvina; Luigi Barbato; Eleonora Biondi; Niccolò Nuti; Leila Brancato; Giovanna Delle Rose
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2011-09

2.  The effect of hierarchical micro/nanosurface titanium implant on osseointegration in ovariectomized sheep.

Authors:  J Xiao; H Zhou; L Zhao; Y Sun; S Guan; B Liu; L Kong
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Preservation and promotion of bone formation in the mandible as a response to a novel calcium-phosphate based biomaterial in mineral deficiency induced low bone mass male versus female rats.

Authors:  Kritika Srinivasan; Diana P Naula; Dindo Q Mijares; Malvin N Janal; Racquel Z LeGeros; Yu Zhang
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 4.396

4.  Impact of osteoporosis in dental implants: A systematic review.

Authors:  Gabriela Giro; Leandro Chambrone; Abrao Goldstein; Jose Augusto Rodrigues; Elton Zenóbio; Magda Feres; Luciene Cristina Figueiredo; Alessandra Cassoni; Jamil Awad Shibli
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-03-18

5.  Zoledronic acid enhances bone-implant osseointegration more than alendronate and strontium ranelate in ovariectomized rats.

Authors:  B Chen; Y Li; X Yang; H Xu; D Xie
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 6.  Osteoporosis: Its Prosthodontic Considerations - A Review.

Authors:  Vinod Bandela; Bharathi Munagapati; Rajeev K Reddy Karnati; Giridhar Reddy Sirupa Venkata; Simhachalam Reddy Nidudhur
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-12-01

7.  Circadian rhythm and cartilage extracellular matrix genes in osseointegration: a genome-wide screening of implant failure by vitamin D deficiency.

Authors:  Cristiane Machado Mengatto; Federico Mussano; Yoshitomo Honda; Christopher S Colwell; Ichiro Nishimura
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Indications and contraindications of dental implants in medically compromised patients: update.

Authors:  Rafael Gómez-de Diego; María del Rocío Mang-de la Rosa; María-Jesús Romero-Pérez; Antonio Cutando-Soriano; Antonio López-Valverde-Centeno
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2014-09-01

9.  Smoking, radiotherapy, diabetes and osteoporosis as risk factors for dental implant failure: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hui Chen; Nizhou Liu; Xinchen Xu; Xinhua Qu; Eryi Lu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Improved anchorage of Ti6Al4V orthopaedic bone implants through oligonucleotide mediated immobilization of BMP-2 in osteoporotic rats.

Authors:  Julia V Wölfle; Jörg Fiedler; Lutz Dürselen; Judith Reichert; Dieter Scharnweber; Anne Förster; Bernd Schwenzer; Heiko Reichel; Anita Ignatius; Rolf E Brenner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.