Literature DB >> 34650304

[Clinical observation of the curative effect after 5-year follow-up of single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region].

F Liang1, M J Wu1, L D Zou1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical curative effect after 5-year follow-up of single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region.
METHODS: In the study, patients with single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region after loading 5-year in the Second Clinical Division of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology from October 2005 to May 2010 was enrolled. The implant survival rate, prosthetic conditions (including the structural integrity or loosening of the prosthesis, the retention of the materials used to fill access holes of screw-retained implant crowns, loosening or fractures of the implant abutment or screw) and marginal bone lever level around implants were determined by clinical and radiographic examination.
RESULTS: The study was composed of 215 patients, the mean age was 48.6 years (range: 27 to 71), and 321 soft tissue implants were inserted. There were 9 implants loose and lost during the visit, the cumulative success rate was 97.2%. In the 312 remaining implants, 120 implants were placed in the upper jaws (38.5%) and 192 in the lower jaws (61.5%). Three different diameters as 3.3 mm (5 implants), 4.1 mm (115 implants) and 4.8 mm (192 implants) and three different lengths as 8 mm (21 implants), 10 mm (206 implants) and 12 mm (85 implants) were used, respectively. 277 (88.8%) cement-retained and 35 (11.2%) screw-retained implant-supported single crowns were made. The marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants after loading 5 years in the mesial and distal sides were (0.73±0.25) mm and (0.78±0.26) mm, respectively. There was no significant difference among MBL and bone quality, implant type, angle of abutment, prosthodontic type, crown-to-implant ratio, gender, and age of the patients (P > 0.05). The major mechanical complications after restoration involved loosening (8.6%) and fracture (2.9%) of the crown retainer screw, loss of resin covering the screw (11.4%), and the most frequent mechanical complications were loss of crown retention (14.1%) and fracture of porcelain (13.8%). The incidence of loss of crown retention was correlated with insufficient clinical crown height or using angle abutment (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: After loading 5 years, the bone level around the soft-tissue-implant placed in posterior region was stable. To minimize the frequency of mechanical complications after restoration, protocols must be established from diagnosis to the completion of treatment and follow up of implant-supported prostheses, especially in terms of adequate technical steps and careful radiographic evaluation of the components.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone resorption; Dental implant; Dental prosthesis; Implant-supported

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34650304      PMCID: PMC8517672     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban        ISSN: 1671-167X


  11 in total

Review 1.  Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates.

Authors:  Franck Renouard; David Nisand
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 5.977

2.  Six-year clinical and histologic study of sinus-lift grafts.

Authors:  S L Wheeler; R E Holmes; C J Calhoun
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 3.  Systematic review of the survival rate and incidence of biologic, technical, and esthetic complications of single implant abutments supporting fixed prostheses.

Authors:  Anja Zembic; Sunjai Kim; Marcel Zwahlen; J Robert Kelly
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Marginal bone loss as success criterion in implant dentistry: beyond 2 mm.

Authors:  Pablo Galindo-Moreno; Ana León-Cano; Inmaculada Ortega-Oller; Alberto Monje; Francisco O Valle; Andrés Catena
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2014-01-03       Impact factor: 5.977

Review 5.  Clinician assessments and patient perspectives of single-tooth implant restorations in the esthetic zone of the maxilla: A systematic review.

Authors:  Sirikarn P Arunyanak; Adrien Pollini; Athanasios Ntounis; Dean Morton
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 3.426

6.  Retrospective clinical evaluation of implant-supported single crowns: Mean follow-up of 15 years.

Authors:  Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic; Jenö Kisch; Christel Larsson
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 5.977

Review 7.  A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns.

Authors:  Ronald E Jung; Bjarni E Pjetursson; Roland Glauser; Anja Zembic; Marcel Zwahlen; Niklaus P Lang
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 5.977

8.  A systematic review of survival of single implants as presented in longitudinal studies with a follow-up of at least 10 years.

Authors:  Lars Hjalmarsson; Maryam Gheisarifar; Torsten Jemt
Journal:  Eur J Oral Implantol       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 3.123

9.  Impact of crestal and subcrestal implant placement upon changes in marginal peri-implant bone level. A systematic review.

Authors:  H Pellicer-Chover; M Díaz-Sanchez; D Soto-Peñaloza; M-A Peñarrocha-Diago; L Canullo; D Peñarrocha-Oltra
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2019-09-01

Review 10.  Marginal bone loss 1 year after implantation: a systematic review for fixed and removable restorations.

Authors:  Jennifer Zimmermann; Melanie Sommer; Leticia Grize; Stefan Stubinger
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2019-07-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.