Literature DB >> 30448466

15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla.

Eduardo Anitua1, Mohammad H Alkhraisat2.   

Abstract

There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla) on these outcomes. A clinical retrospective study of short dental implants (≤8.5mm) was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. The secondary outcomes were the marginal bone loss, the prosthesis failures and the influence of anatomical location, the antagonist type, and the clinical/anatomical crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the marginal bone loss and implant success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients' demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic variables. Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess the implant survival rate. Fifty patients with a mean age of 59±10years had a mean follow-up time of 15years. Seventy five implants were placed being 30 in the maxilla and 45 in the mandible. The implant position did not affect significantly the implant survival. The marginal bone loss has been significantly higher in the maxilla than the mandible. The implant survival rate was 93.3%. Short dental implants could be indicated to support fixed partial prosthesis in the mandible and the maxilla. Implant position may affect the marginal bone loss around the short dental implants.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone type; Implant survival; Long-term; Marginal bone loss; Short implant

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30448466     DOI: 10.1016/j.aanat.2018.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Anat        ISSN: 0940-9602            Impact factor:   2.698


  10 in total

Review 1.  Titanium Dental Implants: An Overview of Applied Nanobiotechnology to Improve Biocompatibility and Prevent Infections.

Authors:  Rayane C S Silva; Almerinda Agrelli; Audrey N Andrade; Carina L Mendes-Marques; Isabel R S Arruda; Luzia R L Santos; Niedja F Vasconcelos; Giovanna Machado
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 3.748

2.  Survival Rate of 1008 Short Dental Implants with 21 Months of Average Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  João Caramês; Ana Catarina Pinto; Gonçalo Caramês; Helena Francisco; Joana Fialho; Duarte Marques
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-12-05       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Digital Approach for the Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla with Pterygoid and Standard Implants: The Static and Dynamic Computer-Aided Protocols.

Authors:  Alessio Franchina; Luigi Vito Stefanelli; Simone Gorini; Simone Fedi; Giuseppe Lizio; Gerardo Pellegrino
Journal:  Methods Protoc       Date:  2020-12-21

4.  Comparison of peri-implant marginal bone level changes between tapered and straight implant designs: 5-year follow-up results.

Authors:  Han Park; Ik-Sang Moon; Chooryung Chung; Su-Jung Shin; Jong-Ki Huh; Jeong-Ho Yun; Dong-Won Lee
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 2.614

5.  Single-crown restorations in premolar-molar regions: short (≤ 6.5) vs longer implants: retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Eduardo Anitua; Asier Eguia; Mohammad Hamdan Alkhraisat
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2022-10-04

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

7.  Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm) versus Standard Dental Implants (≥10 mm): A One-Year Post-Loading Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Guillermo Pardo-Zamora; Antonio José Ortiz-Ruíz; Fabio Camacho-Alonso; José Francisco Martínez-Marco; Juan Manuel Molina-González; Núria Piqué-Clusella; Ascensión Vicente-Hernández
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Eleven-year follow-up of reconstruction with autogenous iliac bone graft and implant-supported fixed complete denture for severe maxillary atrophy: A case report.

Authors:  Jae-Hyun Lee; In-Sung Luke Yeo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.889

9.  Long-Term Comparison of Survival and Marginal Bone of Implants with and without Sinus Augmentation in Maxillary Molars within the Same Patients: A 5.8- to 22-Year Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Won-Bae Park; Ji-Young Han; Kyung-Lhi Kang
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 4.241

10.  Short Narrow Dental Implants versus Long Narrow Dental Implants in Fixed Prostheses: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Authors:  Eduardo Antiua; Virginia Escuer; Mohammad H Alkhraisat
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-04
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.