Literature DB >> 21689162

Influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio on the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations: a cross-sectional retrospective 5-year investigation.

David Schneider1, Lukas Witt1, Christoph H F Hämmerle1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio (c/i ratio) on the implant survival, changes of the marginal bone level (MBL) and the occurrence of biological and technical complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This cross-sectional retrospective study included all patients with implants in the posterior segments supporting single crown restorations with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. All patients were questioned and examined clinically and radiographically. The technical and biological c/i ratio and the MBL were measured on digitized periapical radiographs. The following outcome parameters in relation to the c/i ratio and the co-factors were statistically analyzed: implant survival rate, MBL, occurrence of technical and biological complications. For statistical analysis, regression, correlation and survival analyses were applied (P<0.05).
RESULTS: Seventy patients (mean age of 50.7 years [range 19.8-76.6 years]) with a total of 100 implants (24 Straumann type, 76 Brånemark type) were included in this study. The mean follow-up period was 6.2 years (range 4.73-11.7 years). Six implants failed during the follow-up period, yielding a cumulative survival rate of 95.8% at 5 years in function. The mean technical c/i ratio was 1.04 (±0.26, range 0.59-2.01). The mean biological c/i ratio was 1.48 (±0.42, range 0.82-3.24). No statistically significant influence of the technical and biological c/i ratio was found on the implant survival, MBL and occurrence of technical and biological complications. When adjusted for the biological c/i ratio, smoking was the only co-factor significantly associated with implant failure and biological complications.
CONCLUSION: In the present study, the c/i ratio did not influence the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations in the posterior segments of the jaw within the range tested.
© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21689162     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02230.x

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


  9 in total

1.  Posterior partially edentulous jaws, planning a rehabilitation with dental implants.

Authors:  Douglas R Monteiro; Emily V F Silva; Eduardo P Pellizzer; Osvaldo Magro Filho; Marcelo C Goiato
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 1.337

2.  Occlusion for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in partially edentulous patients: a literature review and current concepts.

Authors:  Judy Chia-Chun Yuan; Cortino Sukotjo
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 2.614

3.  Short implants (≤6 mm) versus longer implants with sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qi Yan; Xinyu Wu; Meiying Su; Fang Hua; Bin Shi
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation.

Authors:  Xiaoran Yu; Ruogu Xu; Zhengchuan Zhang; Yang Yang; Feilong Deng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Single-crown restorations supported by short implants (6 mm) compared with standard-length implants (13 mm) in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Helle Baungaard Nielsen; Søren Schou; Niels Henrik Bruun; Thomas Starch-Jensen
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-16

6.  The Influence of the Crown-Implant Ratio on the Crestal Bone Level and Implant Secondary Stability: 36-Month Clinical Study.

Authors:  Jakub Hadzik; Maciej Krawiec; Konstanty Sławecki; Christiane Kunert-Keil; Marzena Dominiak; Tomasz Gedrange
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Is there an effect of crown-to-implant ratio on implant treatment outcomes? A systematic review.

Authors:  Henny J A Meijer; Carina Boven; Konstantina Delli; Gerry M Raghoebar
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  A case of effective oral rehabilitation after mandibular resection.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Kataoka; Yuichi Akagi; Chie Kagawa; Ryo Sasaki; Toshihiro Okamoto; Tomohiro Ando
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2019-09-27

9.  CT-based dentulous mandibular alveolar ridge measurements as predictors of crown-to-implant ratio for short and extra short dental implants.

Authors:  Francesco Cavallin; Stefano Sivolella; Silvia Meggiorin; Nadia Ferrarese; Amalia Lupi; Antonino Fiorino; Chiara Giraudo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.