Se-Lim Oh1, Harlan J Shiau2, Mark A Reynolds3. 1. Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Maryland School of Dentistry, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: soh@umaryland.edu. 2. Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Maryland School of Dentistry, Baltimore, MD. 3. Professor, Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Maryland School of Dentistry, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Despite an overall high survival rate for dental implants, the effectiveness of implant retreatment remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the survival rate of implants placed at sites which had an implant failure and to investigate factors that might affect outcomes after retreatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search of electronic databases limited to English language articles was conducted using the following MeSH terms: "dental implants," "dental implantation," or "dental restoration failure," combined with "retreatment," "replacement," or "reoperation." A hand search of selected journals was also performed. Of the retrieved 668 publications, 8 retrospective clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, providing the survival outcome for 673 implants in 557 patients after retreatment. Implant- and patient-related characteristics related to implant failures were assessed. RESULTS: The weighted mean survival rate for implants after retreatment was 86.3%, with follow-up ranging from less than 1 year to over 5 years. The survival rates of smooth-surfaced and rough-surfaced implants were compared in 217 retreated implants, revealing a significantly higher survival rate for rough-surfaced implants than for smooth-surfaced implants (90% versus 68.7%). Insufficient data were available to evaluate the effect of patient- or treatment-related characteristics on the survival of implants after retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: The survival rate of retreated implants is lower than that generally reported after initial implant placement. Higher survival rates were reported with rough-surfaced implants than with smooth-surfaced implants in retreatment. An overall implant survival rate of 86.3% after retreatment suggests that most initial implant failures are likely attributable to modifiable risk factors, such as implant architecture, anatomic site, infection, and occlusal overload.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Despite an overall high survival rate for dental implants, the effectiveness of implant retreatment remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the survival rate of implants placed at sites which had an implant failure and to investigate factors that might affect outcomes after retreatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search of electronic databases limited to English language articles was conducted using the following MeSH terms: "dental implants," "dental implantation," or "dental restoration failure," combined with "retreatment," "replacement," or "reoperation." A hand search of selected journals was also performed. Of the retrieved 668 publications, 8 retrospective clinical studies met the inclusion criteria, providing the survival outcome for 673 implants in 557 patients after retreatment. Implant- and patient-related characteristics related to implant failures were assessed. RESULTS: The weighted mean survival rate for implants after retreatment was 86.3%, with follow-up ranging from less than 1 year to over 5 years. The survival rates of smooth-surfaced and rough-surfaced implants were compared in 217 retreated implants, revealing a significantly higher survival rate for rough-surfaced implants than for smooth-surfaced implants (90% versus 68.7%). Insufficient data were available to evaluate the effect of patient- or treatment-related characteristics on the survival of implants after retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: The survival rate of retreated implants is lower than that generally reported after initial implant placement. Higher survival rates were reported with rough-surfaced implants than with smooth-surfaced implants in retreatment. An overall implant survival rate of 86.3% after retreatment suggests that most initial implant failures are likely attributable to modifiable risk factors, such as implant architecture, anatomic site, infection, and occlusal overload.
Authors: Guilherme Aparecido Monteiro Duque da Fonseca; Marcos Fernando Xisto Braga Cavalcanti; José Daniel de Souza Maior; Juliana da Silva Pereira; Leandro Augusto Pinto; Murilo Matias; Lucio Frigo Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Aina Torrejon-Moya; Keila Izquierdo-Gómez; Mario Pérez-Sayáns; Enric Jané-Salas; Antonio Marí Roig; José López-López Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: William A Lackington; Lada Fleyshman; Peter Schweizer; Yvonne Elbs-Glatz; Stefanie Guimond; Markus Rottmar Journal: Mater Today Bio Date: 2022-05-22
Authors: Alexandra Ripszky Totan; Marina Melescanu Imre; Simona Parvu; Daniela Meghea; Radu Radulescu; Dan Sebastian Alexandru Enasescu; Mihai Radu Moisa; Silviu Mirel Pituru Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 3.748