Literature DB >> 29923628

Technical complications following implant-supported restorative therapy performed in Sweden.

Karolina Karlsson1, Jan Derks1, Jan Håkansson1, Jan L Wennström1, Margareta Molin Thorén2, Max Petzold3, Tord Berglundh1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence and consequences of technical complications in implant-supported restorative therapy. MATERIAL &
METHODS: The occurrence and consequences of technical complications in implant-supported restorative therapy over a mean follow-up period of 5.3 years were assessed based on documentation in files from 2,666 patients. Risk indicators were identified by the use of survival models, considering repeated events. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HR) including 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: Technical complications occurred in 24.8% of the patients. Chipping and loss of retention were the most common, affecting 11.0% and 7.9% of supraconstructions, respectively, while implant-related complications (e.g., implant fracture) were rare. More than 50% of the affected patients experienced technical complications more than once and almost all reported complications led to interventions by a dental professional. The extent of the supraconstruction was the strongest risk indicator for both chipping (HR < 0.2) and loss of retention (HR > 3).
CONCLUSION: Over a 5-year period, technical complications in implant-supported restorative therapy occurred frequently and their management required professional intervention.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diagnosis/clinical assessment; epidemiology; prosthodontics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29923628     DOI: 10.1111/clr.13271

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


  6 in total

1.  Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-Year results of a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Daniel S Thoma; Karin Wolleb; Roman Schellenberg; Franz-Josef Strauss; Christoph H F Hämmerle; Ronald E Jung
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 7.478

2.  Performance evaluation of survival regression models in analysing Swedish dental implant complication data with frailty.

Authors:  Adeniyi Francis Fagbamigbe; Karolina Karlsson; Jan Derks; Max Petzold
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Comparison of porcelain veneer fracture in implant-supported fixed full-arch prostheses with a framework of either titanium, cobalt-chromium, or zirconia: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Märta Vahnström; Petra H Johansson; Per Svanborg; Victoria F Stenport
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2022-03-21

4.  Clinical and radiographical performance of implants placed with simultaneous guided bone regeneration using resorbable and nonresorbable membranes after 22-24 years, a prospective, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Ronald E Jung; Lily V Brügger; Stefan P Bienz; Jürg Hüsler; Christoph H F Hämmerle; Nicola U Zitzmann
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2021-10-03       Impact factor: 5.021

5.  A retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes of implant restorations for posterior edentulous area: 3-unit bridge supported by 2 implants vs 3 splinted implant-supported crowns.

Authors:  Yuseung Yi; Seong-Joo Heo; Jai-Young Koak; Seong-Kyun Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 1.989

6.  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 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.