BACKGROUND: Dental implants are a predictable treatment option for replacing missing teeth and have strong survival and success outcomes. However, previous research showed a wide array of potential risk factors that may have contributed to dental implant failures. The objectives of this study are to study if implant survival rates were affected by known risk factors and risk indicators that may have contributed to implant failures. The secondary outcome measures were whether the level of expertise of the periodontal residents affected success rates and how the rate of implant success at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine (HSDM) compared to published standards. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients at the HSDM who had one of two types of rough-surface implants (group A or B) placed by periodontology residents from 2003 to 2006 was performed. Demographic, health, and implant data were collected and analyzed by multimodel analyses to determine failure rates and any factors that may have increased the likelihood of an implant failure. RESULTS: The study cohort included 341 dental implants. The odds ratio for an implant failure was most clearly elevated for diabetes (2.59 implant surface group B (7.84), and male groups (4.01). There was no significant difference regarding the resident experience. The success rate for HSDM periodontology residents was 96.48% during the 4-year study period. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that implant success rates at HSDM fell within accepted published standards, confirmed previously identified risk factors for a failure, and potentially suggested that other acknowledged risk factors could be controlled for. Furthermore, the level of experience of the periodontology resident did not have an impact on survival outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Dental implants are a predictable treatment option for replacing missing teeth and have strong survival and success outcomes. However, previous research showed a wide array of potential risk factors that may have contributed to dental implant failures. The objectives of this study are to study if implant survival rates were affected by known risk factors and risk indicators that may have contributed to implant failures. The secondary outcome measures were whether the level of expertise of the periodontal residents affected success rates and how the rate of implant success at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine (HSDM) compared to published standards. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients at the HSDM who had one of two types of rough-surface implants (group A or B) placed by periodontology residents from 2003 to 2006 was performed. Demographic, health, and implant data were collected and analyzed by multimodel analyses to determine failure rates and any factors that may have increased the likelihood of an implant failure. RESULTS: The study cohort included 341 dental implants. The odds ratio for an implant failure was most clearly elevated for diabetes (2.59 implant surface group B (7.84), and male groups (4.01). There was no significant difference regarding the resident experience. The success rate for HSDM periodontology residents was 96.48% during the 4-year study period. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that implant success rates at HSDM fell within accepted published standards, confirmed previously identified risk factors for a failure, and potentially suggested that other acknowledged risk factors could be controlled for. Furthermore, the level of experience of the periodontology resident did not have an impact on survival outcomes.
Authors: Patricia A Lopes; Adriana F P Carreiro; Rubens M Nascimento; Brendan R Vahey; Bruno Henriques; Júlio C M Souza Journal: Eur J Dent Date: 2018 Jan-Mar
Authors: Estevam A Bonfante; Lukasz Witek; Nick Tovar; Marcelo Suzuki; Charles Marin; Rodrigo Granato; Paulo G Coelho Journal: Int J Biomater Date: 2012-08-27
Authors: Rajkiran Chitumalla; K V Halini Kumari; Abhilash Mohapatra; Anuj Singh Parihar; K S Anand; Padmavathi Katragadda Journal: Contemp Clin Dent Date: 2018-09