Robert Niedermaier1,2, Florian Stelzle1,3, Max Riemann1, Wolfgang Bolz1, Paul Schuh1, Hannes Wachtel1,2. 1. Dentist, Implaneo Dental Clinic, Private Institute of Periodontology and Implantology, Munich, Germany. 2. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Charité-Medical University Berlin, Germany. 3. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical Faculty, University Hospital of Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of severely atrophied and edentulous jaws by means of fixed implant supported solutions is a challenging procedure. PURPOSE: The immediate loading of four to six axial and tilted implants offers the possibility to overcome elaborate hard tissue augmentation procedures but lacks implant and patient related data on implant survival rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective 7-years clinical trial investigated the implant survival rates of 2,081 implants (380 patients, 482 jaws) using an immediate loading protocol with either 4, 5, or 6 implants per restoration. Survival rates were calculated concerning implantation related factors (jaws/number of supporting implants/angulations/diameters/lengths) and patient related factors (medical status/smoking). RESULTS: Overall survival of 2,081 implants was 97.0% on implant level. Survival rates of implantation related factors did not yield significant differences. Significant differences were yield between healthy patients and patients with osteoporosis (p = .002) and the medical status group "other" (p = .032), respectively. Smokers yielded a significantly higher survival than nonsmokers (p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: It is assumed that four implants per jaw serve as a sufficient implant number for full arch restorations in both, the mandible and the maxilla. Osteoporosis under the medication with bisphosphonates seems to be a risk factor for implant survival. The authors suggest that the effect of smoking on ISRs remains controversial within this treatment concept.
BACKGROUND: The treatment of severely atrophied and edentulous jaws by means of fixed implant supported solutions is a challenging procedure. PURPOSE: The immediate loading of four to six axial and tilted implants offers the possibility to overcome elaborate hard tissue augmentation procedures but lacks implant and patient related data on implant survival rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective 7-years clinical trial investigated the implant survival rates of 2,081 implants (380 patients, 482 jaws) using an immediate loading protocol with either 4, 5, or 6 implants per restoration. Survival rates were calculated concerning implantation related factors (jaws/number of supporting implants/angulations/diameters/lengths) and patient related factors (medical status/smoking). RESULTS: Overall survival of 2,081 implants was 97.0% on implant level. Survival rates of implantation related factors did not yield significant differences. Significant differences were yield between healthy patients and patients with osteoporosis (p = .002) and the medical status group "other" (p = .032), respectively. Smokers yielded a significantly higher survival than nonsmokers (p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: It is assumed that four implants per jaw serve as a sufficient implant number for full arch restorations in both, the mandible and the maxilla. Osteoporosis under the medication with bisphosphonates seems to be a risk factor for implant survival. The authors suggest that the effect of smoking on ISRs remains controversial within this treatment concept.