Literature DB >> 21732984

Long-term follow-up of turned single implants placed in periodontally healthy patients after 16-22 years: radiographic and peri-implant outcome.

M Dierens1, S Vandeweghe1, J Kisch1, K Nilner1, H De Bruyn1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Retrospectively evaluate the survival, radiographic and peri-implant outcome of single turned Brånemark™ implants after at least 16 years.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 134 patients (C-group), 101 could be contacted concerning implant survival and 50 (59 remaining implants) were clinically examined (I-group). Marginal bone level was radiographically measured from the implant-abutment junction at baseline (=within 6 months after abutment connection) and 1-4, 5-8 and 16-22 years post-operatively. Probing depth, gingival and plaque index were measured. Marginal bone-level changes were analyzed using Friedman's and Wilcoxon's signed ranks tests. Spearman's correlations between radiographic and clinical parameters were calculated.
RESULTS: In the C-group, 13 out of 166 implants in 11 out of 134 patients failed (CSR=91.5%). In the I-group (28 males-22 females; mean age 23.9 years at baseline; range 14-57), the mean follow-up was 18.4 years (range 16-22). The mean bone level was 1.7±0.88 mm (range -0.8 to 5) after 16-22 years. Changes in the mean marginal bone level were statistically significant between baseline and the second measuring interval (1-4 years). Thereafter, no significant differences could be demonstrated. The mean interproximal probing depth, gingival and plaque indices were 3.9±1.27 mm, 1.2±0.81 and 0.2±0.48, respectively. Probing depth was moderately correlated with gingival inflammation (r=0.6; P<0.001) but not with bone level (P>0.05). 81.4% of the implants had a bone level ≤2nd thread and 91.5% had a probing depth ≤5 mm. 76.3% had both bone level ≤2nd thread and probing depth ≤5 mm. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The single turned Brånemark™ implant is a predictable solution with high clinical survival and success rates. In general, a steady-state bone level can be expected over decades, with minimal signs of peri-implant disease. A minority (5%), however, presents with progressive bone loss.
© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21732984     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02212.x

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


  13 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review on the long-term success of calcium phosphate plasma-spray-coated dental implants.

Authors:  B A J A van Oirschot; E M Bronkhorst; J J J P van den Beucken; G J Meijer; J A Jansen; R Junker
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.634

2.  Temperature evaluation of dental implant surface irradiated with high-power diode laser.

Authors:  F G Rios; E R Viana; G M Ribeiro; J C González; A Abelenda; D C Peruzzo
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 3.  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

4.  Surface alterations of zirconia and titanium substrates after Er,Cr:YSGG irradiation.

Authors:  Persio Vasconcelos Miranda; José Augusto Rodrigues; Alberto Blay; Jamil Awad Shibli; Alessandra Cassoni
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 3.161

5.  Oral squamous cell carcinoma in the vicinity of dental implants.

Authors:  Maximilian Moergel; Julia Karbach; Martin Kunkel; Wilfried Wagner
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-03-16       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Reality of dental implant surface modification: a short literature review.

Authors:  In-Sung Yeo
Journal:  Open Biomed Eng J       Date:  2014-10-31

Review 7.  Prevalence of Peri-Implantitis in Implants with Turned and Rough Surfaces: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Nikola Saulacic; Benoit Schaller
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2019-03-31

8.  Pro-inflammatory cytokines at zirconia implants and teeth. A cross-sectional assessment.

Authors:  Norbert Cionca; Dena Hashim; Jose Cancela; Catherine Giannopoulou; Andrea Mombelli
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 9.  How do peri-implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri-implantitis? A critical review.

Authors:  Ron Doornewaard; Wolfgang Jacquet; Jan Cosyn; Hugo De Bruyn
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 5.977

10.  Influence of Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique on Peri-Implant Tissues; Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Three-Year Follow-Up. Part II: Soft Tissues.

Authors:  Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Naia Bustamante-Hernández; Carlos Labaig-Rueda; Antonio Fons-Font; Lucía Fernández-Estevan; María Fernanda Solá-Ruíz
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 4.241

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.