Literature DB >> 25856319

Long-term retrospective follow-up of turned and moderately rough implants in the edentulous jaw.

Stefan Vandeweghe1, Deon Ferreira2, Louis Vermeersch3, Margot Mariën3, Hugo De Bruyn1,4.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the long-term clinical outcome of turned vs. moderately rough implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated with implants in the edentulous mandible and/or maxilla were invited for a clinical examination. After prosthesis removal, the pocket depth was measured and the bleeding scored. Also, a new radiograph was taken for bone loss evaluation. Patients were also requested to rate their satisfaction with the treatment.
RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-seven implants in 33 patients were evaluated. After a mean follow-up of 172 months (SD 42, range 120-252), the mean loss was 1.61 mm (SD 1.35, range 0.00-8.25). Bone loss was higher in the maxilla compared to the mandible (P < 0.001), and at implants, that was restored on implant level (P = 0.003). Multivariate analyses demonstrated a significant effect of implant surface roughness and time of loading on bone loss. Smoking, on the other hand, did not affect the outcome. Mean pocket probing depth was 3.64 mm (SD 0.96, range 1.25-7.25). A total of 4.1% of the implants demonstrated signs of peri-implantitis. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 98.5%.
CONCLUSION: Implant treatment in the edentulous jaw has a predictable long-term outcome with limited complications.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dental implants; edentulous; long term; peri-implantitis; surface roughness

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25856319     DOI: 10.1111/clr.12602

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


  8 in total

1.  Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of a Novel Triangular Implant Neck Design: A Case Series.

Authors:  James Rudolph Collins; Brendha P Ogando; Houlin Hong; Wei Hou; Georgios E Romanos
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-16

2.  What is the prevalence of peri-implantitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pedro Diaz; Esther Gonzalo; Luis J Gil Villagra; Barbara Miegimolle; Maria J Suarez
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-10-19       Impact factor: 3.747

3.  The Long-Term Effect of Smoking on 10 Years' Survival and Success of Dental Implants: A Prospective Analysis of 453 Implants in a Non-University Setting.

Authors:  Simon Windael; Stijn Vervaeke; Stefanie De Buyser; Hugo De Bruyn; Bruno Collaert
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 4.  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

5.  Influence of Drilling Technique on the Radiographic, Thermographic, and Geomorphometric Effects of Dental Implant Drills and Osteotomy Site Preparations.

Authors:  Lara Fraguas de San José; Filippo Maria Ruggeri; Roberta Rucco; Álvaro Zubizarreta-Macho; Jorge Alonso Pérez-Barquero; Elena Riad Deglow; Sofía Hernández Montero
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 6.  Implications of considering peri-implant bone loss a disease, a narrative review.

Authors:  Tomas Albrektsson; Pentti Tengvall; Luis Amengual-Peñafiel; Pierluigi Coli; Georgios Kotsakis; David L Cochran
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 4.259

Review 7.  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

8.  Sandblasting reduces dental implant failure rate but not marginal bone level loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  László Márk Czumbel; Beáta Kerémi; Noémi Gede; Alexandra Mikó; Barbara Tóth; Dezső Csupor; Andrea Szabó; Sándor Farkasdi; Gábor Gerber; Márta Balaskó; Erika Pétervári; Róbert Sepp; Péter Hegyi; Gábor Varga
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.