The effect of age, gender, and insertion site on marginal bone loss around endosseous implants: results from a 3-year trial with premium implant system

Multivariate analysis of the effect of keratinized mucosa on peri-implant tissues with platform switching: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, platform switching implant treatment has been increasing, which is believed to minimize bone loss around the implant after placement. However, there have been no reports on the relationship between keratinized mucosa width (KMW) and bone loss and soft tissue recession in platform switching implants.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effect of the KMW on the amount of bone loss and soft tissue recession around a platform switching implant retrospectively using multivariate analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This one-year retrospective study included 91 implants in 48 patients. Age, sex, a history of periodontitis, implant location, oral hygiene status, and the KMW were included as explanatory variables to evaluate bone loss (BL) and buccal gingival height (GH). Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to evaluate the effect of the KMW on platform switching peri-implant tissues.

RESULTS

The mean bone loss on the mesial (ΔBLm), distal (ΔBLd), and buccal (ΔBLb) sides of the implant were 0.16 ± 0.27 mm, 0.19 ± 0.34 mm, and 0.24 ± 0.50 mm, respectively, at 1 year after superstructure placement. The mean amount of change of GH (ΔGH) on the buccal side was 0.30 ± 0.47 mm. After correcting for confounders using GEEs, the results suggested that KMW <1.5 mm was a significant factor (P < 0.001) for bone loss over time in ΔBLm, ΔBLd, and ΔBLb. In addition, for soft tissues on the buccal side, KMW <1.5 mm was a significant factor for ΔGH reduction over time (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Keratinized mucosa width ≥1.5 mm was associated with a higher probability less hard and soft tissue recession around the platform switching implant after 1 year from superstructure placement.

Radiographic evaluation of the distance between the restoration margin and the alveolar bone crest in dental implant patients: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

The recently introduced Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) identifies a restoration margin-alveolar bone crest (RM-AC) distance of less than 1.5 mm as a key risk factor for peri‑implant disease among eight major risk factors. This study evaluated the impact of the RM-AC distance on marginal bone loss (MBL) through radiographic analysis.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study included 77 partially edentulous patients (39 females and 38 males, aged 22 to 76 years) with 202 platform-switched conical connection implants, cement-retained, implant-supported fixed restorations, and bone-level implants placed between 2016 and 2021. Dental implants were followed for least 6 to 36 months at follow up functional loading. Study participants were categorized into Group A (RM-AC distance ≤ 1.5 mm, n = 69) and Group B (RM-AC distance > 1.5 mm, n = 133). Twelve patients in Group B and five patients in Group A had no history of periodontal disease. The MBL was measured radiographically from the most coronal point of the implant shoulder to the alveolar bone, and the RM-AC distance was measured from the restoration margin to the alveolar crest. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS

The incidence of MBL in Group A was statistically significant and 3.42 times higher than that in Group B. The rate of MBL in periodontitis Stage 4 was found to be 26.31 times higher than that in periodontitis Stage 2. The incidence of MBL was 6.097 and 5.02 times higher with increasing implant diameter and length, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study conclusively demonstrates that RM-AC distance ≤ 1.5 significantly increases the risk of MBL, particularly in patients with a history of periodontal disease.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study highlights the critical role of maintaining an RM-AC distance greater than 1.5 mm in the prevention of MBL, particularly in patients with a history of periodontal disease. Since implant diameter and length have a significant impact on the risk of MBL, it emphasizes that implant demographics should also be carefully evaluated.

The cumulative survival rate of sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched dental implants: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

This retrospective study aimed to assess the long-term cumulative survival rate of titanium, sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched implants over a 10-year follow-up period and investigate the factors affecting the survival rate and change in marginal bone loss (MBL).

METHODS

The study included 400 patients who underwent dental implant placement at the Department of Periodontology of Seoul National University Dental Hospital (SNUDH) between 2005 and 2015. Panoramic radiographic images and dental records of patients were collected and examined using Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, and multiple regression analysis to determine the survival rates and identify any factors related to implant failure and MBL.

RESULTS

A total of 782 implants were placed with a follow-up period ranging from 0 to 16 years (mean: 8.21±3.75 years). Overall, 25 implants were lost, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 96.8%. Comparisons of the research variables regarding cumulative survival rate mostly yielded insignificant results. The mean mesial and distal MBLs were 1.85±2.31 mm and 1.59±2.03 mm, respectively. Factors influencing these values included age, diabetes mellitus (DM), jaw location, implant diameter, bone augmentation surgery, and prosthetic unit.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that the implant survival rates at SNUDH fell within the acceptable published criteria. The patients' sex, age, DM status, implant location, implant design, implant size, surgical type, bone augmentation, and prosthetic unit had no discernible influence on long-term implant survival. Sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched implants might offer advantages in terms of implant longevity and consistent clinical outcomes.

Clinical study on the association between keratinized mucosa and peri-implant health when external hexagon implants are installed in the posterior region of the maxilla and mandible: a cohort study

This study evaluated the association between keratinized mucosa (KM) and peri-implant health of external hexagon implants in the posterior region in 84 patients with 242 implants. Modified plaque index (MPI), modified sulcular bleeding index (MSBI), probing depth (PD), keratinized mucosa (KM) width, and peri-implant bone loss were evaluated. The implants were divided according to the KM: (1) absence of KM, (2) KM width >0 and <2 mm, and (3) KM width ≥2 mm. Of the 242 implants evaluated, 63 (26.0%) had no KM band, 56 (23.1%) had KM width <2 mm, and 123 (50.8%) had KM width ≥2 mm. One hundred and sixty-seven (69.0%) were used in multiple unit restorations and 75 (31.0%) in single tooth restorations; 66.9% were placed in the mandible and 33.1% in the maxilla. For single tooth and multiple unit implant restorations, MPI (P=0.069 and P=0.387, respectively), MSBI (P=0.695 and P=0.947, respectively), PD (P=0.270 and P=0.258, respectively), and mesial bone loss (P=0.121 and P=0.239, respectively) were not affected by the KM width. On the distal surface, bone loss was influenced by the absence of KM when single tooth implant restorations were used (P=0.032). No association was found between KM width and the peri-implant tissue health.

Simultaneous implant placement and restoration with guided bone regeneration in the mandibular anterior region

BACKGROUND

Restoring the mandibular anterior teeth by implants can be difficult due to potential complications arising from using prosthetic implant connections that are larger than the incisors at the cementoenamel junction level.

METHODS

This retrospective study is aimed at determining the survival and esthetic outcomes of anterior mandible implants immediately placed and restored in patients diagnosed with stages 3-4 periodontitis. The study included 75 implants that were inserted along with guided bone regeneration in 42 patients. Over a follow-up period of 3 to 8 years (mean of 6.95 ± 1.78 years), the study evaluated esthetic, marginal bone loss (MBL), and biological and prosthetic complications.

RESULTS

No failures were recorded during the follow-up period; after eight years, the survival rate was 100%. Patient's age and gender did not have a statistically significant impact on MBL, but smokers had a greater MBL than non-smokers at the 8-year (2.98 mm vs. 1.23 mm, respectively, p = 0.016) time-point. At 3 years, only 13.3% of the implants had mesial papillae, 36.0% had distal papillae, and 16.0% had the cervical metallic part of the abutment exposed. Peri-implantitis was diagnosed in 20.7% of the patients at the 8-year follow-up time.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limitations of this study, immediate placement and restoration of the mandibular incisors can be a feasible procedure, but only a few implants achieved the complete restoration of the papillae.

Investigating the effect of insertion torque on marginal bone loss around dental implants

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The use of dental implants in restoring function, esthetics, speech, and health of oral tissues has been growing in recent years. Evaluating marginal bone resorption and the survival rate of implants placed with different torques values is crucial. The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of different insertion torque values on marginal bone loss around dental implants placed in the posterior region of the mandible.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

37 patients were involved in this study. Patient data (age, gender), implant characteristics (length, diameter), insertion torque values, gingival biotype, and bone quality were recorded, and parallel periapical radiographs measured marginal bone loss. The relationship between variables was obtained using independent t-tests, Pearson correlations, and regressions.

RESULTS

The present study found a positive and significant correlation between implant insertion torque and marginal bone loss (MBL)around the dental implants during the first year after placement. Furthermore, patients with D2 bone density at the implant placement site and thin gingival biotype also had significantly higher MBLs from baseline until crown delivery and first-year follow-up than those with D3 bone density and thick gingival biotypes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A lower torque is necessary for high-risk patients to increase implantation success due to identifying patients with an increased risk for MBL.

Multicentre Prospective Study Analysing Relevant Factors Related to Marginal Bone Loss: A Two-Year Evolution

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this prospective descriptive study was to analyse the possible variables associated with marginal bone loss in rehabilitated implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain) two years after their prosthetic loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three clinical centres collaborated for a period of two years after the prosthetic rehabilitation of the implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain), in which marginal bone loss and the possible associated variables were evaluated. The collection form comprised different variables throughout different stages of the implant procedure, from implant insertion to the subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation, over a two-year period. Data of the patients and implant characteristics were studied. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS for qualitative (univariate logistic regressions, Chi2 test, and Haberman's corrected standardised residuals) and quantitative variables (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).

RESULTS

The total study sample consisted of 218 implants (Proclinic S.A.U, Zaragoza, Spain). The sample presented a frequency of 99 men (45.4%) and 119 women (54.6%). The mean age of the patients among the reported cases was 58.56 ± 10.12 years. A statistically significant association was found between marginal bone loss 2 years after prosthetic rehabilitation placement and several variables, including age (under 55 years, 0.25 mm ± 0.56; 55-64 years, 0.74 mm ± 0.57; over 65 years, 0.63 mm ± 0.55; p < 0.0001), gender (female, 0.74 mm ± 0.61; male, 0.34 mm ± 0.51; p < 0.0001), bone quality (D1, 0.75 mm ± 0.62; D2, 0.43 mm ± 0.57; D3, 0.65 mm ± 0.60; p < 0.01), implant diameter (up to 4 mm, 0.49 mm ± 0.58; more than 4 mm, 1.21 mm ± 0.30; p < 0.0001), prosthetic connection type (direct to implant, 0.11 mm ± 0.58; transepithelial straight, 0.67 mm ± 0.57; transepithelial angled, 0.33 mm ± 0.25; p < 0001), implant model (internal conical, 0.17 mm ± 0.24; external conical, 0.48 mm ± 0.61; external cylindrical, 1.12 mm ± 0.32; p < 0.0001), prosthetic restoration type (full denture, 0.59 mm ± 0.59; partial denture, 0.50 mm ± 0.85; unitary crown, 0.08 mm ± 0.19; p < 0.05), and insertion torque (>35 N/cm, 0.53 mm ± 0.58; <35 N/cm, 1.04 mm ± 0.63; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

At 2 years, marginal bone loss following prosthetic rehabilitation was shown to be influenced by multiple factors. Correct implantological planning is of vital importance for successful rehabilitation.

Influence of Crown-Implant Ratio and Implant Inclination on Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants Supporting Single Crowns in the Posterior Region: A Retrospective Clinical Study

The aim of this present record-based retrospective study was to investigate the influence of the crown-implant ratio (CIR) and implant inclination in relation to the occlusal plane on the marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants supporting single crowns in the posterior region of the jaws. All the cases of implant-supported single crowns in the premolar and molar regions were initially considered for inclusion. Only implants not lost, with baseline radiographs taken within 12 months after implant placement and with a minimum of 36 months of radiological follow-up, were considered for the analysis of MBL. Univariate linear regression models were used to compare MBL over time between 12 clinical covariates, after which a linear mixed-effects model was built. After the exclusion of 49 cases, a total of 316 implant-supported single crowns in 234 patients were included. The results from the statistical models suggested that implant inclination and anatomical- and clinical CIR (the main related factors investigated in the study) were not statistically significantly related to MBL over time. Age (older people), tooth region (premolar), and bruxism (bruxers) had a statistically significant influence on MBL over time.

Marginal Bone Level and Biomechanical Behavior of Titanium-Indexed Abutment Base of Conical Connection Used for Single Ceramic Crowns on Morse-Taper Implant: A Clinical Retrospective Study

The goal of this retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the behavior of Morse-taper indexed abutments by analyzing the marginal bone level (MBL) after at least 12 months of function. Patients rehabilitated with single ceramic crowns between May 2015 and December 2020 received single Morse-taper connection implants (DuoCone implant) with two-piece straight abutment baseT used for at least 12 months, presenting periapical radiograph immediately after crown installation were enrolled. The position of the rehabilitated tooth and arch (maxilla or mandible), crown installation period, implant dimensions, abutment transmucosal height, installation site (immediate implant placement or healed area), associated with bone regeneration, immediate provisionalization, and complications after installation of the final crown were analyzed. The initial and final MBL was evaluated by comparing the initial and final X-rays. The level of significance was α = 0.05. Seventy-five patients (49 women and 26 men) enrolled had a mean period of evaluation of 22.7 ± 6.2 months. Thirty-one implant-abutment (IA) sets had between 12–18 months, 34 between 19–24 months, and 44 between 25–33 months. Only one patient failed due to an abutment fracture after 25 months of function. Fifty-eight implants were placed in the maxilla (53.2%) and 51 in the mandible (46.8%). Seventy-four implants were installed in healed sites (67.9%), and 35 were in fresh socket sites (32.1%). Thirty-two out of these 35 implants placed in fresh sockets had the gap filled with bone graft particles. Twenty-six implants received immediate provisionalization. The average MBL was −0.67 ± 0.65 mm in mesial and −0.70 ± 0.63 mm in distal (p = 0.5072). The most important finding was the statistically significant difference comparing the values obtained for MBL between the abutments with different transmucosal height portions, which were better for abutments with heights greater than 2.5 mm. Regarding the abutments’ diameter, 58 had 3.5 mm (53.2%) and 51 had 4.5 mm (46.8%). There was no statistical difference between them, with the following means and standard deviation, respectively, −0.57 ± 0.53 mm (mesial) and −0.66 ± 0.50 mm (distal), and −0.78 ± 0.75 mm (mesial) and −0.746 ± 0.76 mm (distal). Regarding the implant dimensions, 24 implants were 3.5 mm (22%), and 85 implants (78%) had 4.0 mm. In length, 51 implants had 9 mm (46.8%), 25 had 11 mm (22.9%), and 33 implants were 13 mm (30.3%). There was no statistical difference between the abutment diameters (p > 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, it was possible to conclude that better behavior and lesser marginal bone loss were observed when using abutment heights greater than 2.5 mm of transmucosal portion and when placed implants with 13 mm length. Furthermore, this type of abutment showed a little incidence of failures within the period analyzed in our study.

Frequency of Smoking and Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants: A Retrospective Matched-Control Study

This dental record-based retrospective study aimed to compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants in a group of smokers in relation to a matched group of non-smokers, with a special focus on five different frequencies of daily smoking (non-smokers, and frequency of 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, and 20 cig./day). Only implants with a minimum of 36 months of radiological follow-up were considered. Univariate linear regression models were used to compare MBL over time between 12 clinical covariates, after which a linear mixed-effects model was built. After matching of the patients, the study included 340 implants in 104 smokers, and 337 implants in 100 non-smokers. The results suggested that smoking degree (greater MBL for higher degrees of smoking), bruxism (greater MBL for bruxers), jaw (greater MBL in maxilla), prosthesis fixation (greater MBL for screw-retained prosthesis), and implant diameter (greater MBL for 3.75-4.10 mm) had a significant influence on MBL over time. There appears to be a positive correlation between the degree of smoking and the degree of MBL, meaning, the higher the degree of smoking, the greater the MBL. However, the difference is not apparent for different degrees of smoking when this is high, namely above 10 cigarettes per day.

Marginal bone loss around dental implants: comparison between matched groups of bruxer and non-bruxer patients: A retrospective case-control study

PURPOSE

To compare marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants in a group of bruxers in relation to a matched group of non-bruxers.

METHODS

The present record-based retrospective study included patients selected from individuals treated with dental implants at one specialist clinic in Malmö. Only implants not lost and with baseline radiographs taken within 12 months after implant placement and with a minimum of 36 months of radiological follow-up were considered for inclusion. Univariate linear regression models and a linear mixed-effects model were performed.

RESULTS

Two hundred and four patients (104 bruxers, 100 non-bruxers), with a total of 811 implants (416 in bruxers, 395 in non-bruxers) were included in the study. The results of the linear mixed-effects model suggested that bruxism, smoking, age, region of the jaws, implant diameter, and prosthesis type had a statistically significant influence on MBL over time. Individuals who are both bruxers and smokers showed greater MBL when compared to individuals who are either a bruxer or smoker, or neither (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Bruxism is suggested to increase the risk of MBL over time, as well as higher age, smoking, and the combination of bruxism and smoking. Other factors that showed a correlation with increased MBL were implant diameter, region of the jaws, and prosthesis type, but it is not possible to draw robust conclusions for these factors, as the categories of these variables were very unbalanced.

Comparative evaluation of dental implants in posterior maxilla placed using unicortical and bicortical anchorage-A split-mouth prospective study

Background

The use of dental implants has become a very predictive method of rehabilitation for patients with partial or complete edentulism. It is more challenging to treat the posterior quadrants of the maxillary ridges using dental implants due to their anatomical and physiological characteristics. So to overcome the limitations of other techniques, short implants were introduced recently as a new approach to simplify implant placement in compromised alveolar bone and to prevent possible damage to vital structures.

Purpose

This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of dental implants placed using the osteotomized sinus floor elevation (OSFE) technique side engaging the bony floor of the maxillary sinus (bicortical anchorage) on one side and the conventional technique by split mouth on the other side.

Materials and Method

This study included 15 patients. Study participants had dental implants placed on both sides of the mouth at the same time, so one side was implanted according to the test method, while the other side used the control method. Randomization determined which side would be implanted.

Conclusion

The OSFE technique provides greater stability to the implant via bicortical anchorage than conventional techniques, which only provide unicortical anchorage.

Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study

Few studies have compared marginal bone loss (MBL) around implant-retaining overdentures (IODs) vs. implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPs). This study evaluated the mean MBL and radiographic bone-implant interface contact (r-BIIC) around IODs and implant-supported FPs. We also investigated osseointegration and MBL around non-submerged dental implants. We measured the changes between the MBL in the mesial and distal sites immediately after prosthetic delivery and after one year. The mean MBL and its changes in the IOD group were significantly higher. The mean percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL and its changes in males were significantly higher in the IOD group. The percentage of r-BIIC was significantly higher in the FP group. MBL in the lower site in the IOD group was significantly higher. Regarding MBL, the location of the implant was the only significant factor in the IOD group, while gender was the only significant predictor in the FP group. Regarding the r-BIIC percentage, gender was a significant factor in the FP group. We concluded that non-submerged dental implants restored with FPs and IODs maintained stable bone remodeling one year after prosthetic delivery.

Role of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Prognosis Dental Implants: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Many recent research shows that antidepressants interfere with the osseointegration of implants. The main purpose of this study was to determine the association between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and dental implant failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

A retrospective study consisted of 410 patients (720 dental implants). Patients' records were used to retrieve the history of SSRI use and medication. The study consists of two groups. Group I (SSRI users) consisted of 128 patients (245 dental implants) patients, whereas Group II (non-SSRI users) was formed by 282 patients (475 dental implants). The implant failure rate was evaluated and statistically examined using the Chi-square test.

RESULTS

Group I had 30 implant failures with 13 (12%) males and 14 (11.8%) females, whereas Group II had 28 implant failures with 12 (6.3%) males and 16 (5.6%) females. In Group I, 26% of the implants failed in the age group >50 years, whereas it was 10.4% in Group II. However, in the age group <50 years, it was 6% and 4.2% Groups I and II, respectively. Group I shows that out of 40 implants in diabetic patients, 12 had failure, whereas in Group II, out of 32 implants placed in diabetics, 7 had failure. In smokers, 48% of the implants failed in Group I, and 29% in group II. In non-smokers the failure was seen in 7.7% cases in Group I and 2.1% cases in Group II. The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The usage of SSRIs is associated with an increased rate of implant failure. It has a deleterious effect on bone remodeling and leads to excessive osteoporosis.

An evaluation of peri-implant marginal bone loss according to implant type, surgical technique and prosthetic rehabilitation: a retrospective multicentre and cross-sectional cohort study

To evaluate implant loss (IL) and marginal bone loss (MBL); follow-up period of up to 10 years after prosthetic loading. Retrospective multi-centre cross-sectional cohort study. Double analysis: (1) all the implants (n = 456) were analysed; (2) to allow for possible cluster error, one implant per patient (n = 143) was selected randomly. Statistical analysis: Spearman's correlation coefficient; Kruskal-Wallis (post-hoc U-Mann-Whitney); Chi-square (post-hoc Haberman). (1) Analysing all the implants (456): IL was observed in patients with past periodontitis (6 vs. 2.2%, p < 0.05), short implants (12 vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001) and when using regenerative surgery (11.3 vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001); greater MBL was observed among smokers (0.39 ± 0.52 vs. 0.2 ± 0.29, p < 0.01), maxillary implants (0.28 ± 0.37 vs. 0.1 ± 0.17, p < 0.0001), anterior region implants (0.32 ± 0.36 vs. 0.21 ± 0.33, p < 0.001), external connection implants (0.2 ± 0.29 vs. 0.63 ± 0.59, p < 0.0001), and 2-3 years after loading (p < 0.0001). (2) analysing the cluster (143): IL was observed in smokers (18.8 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.05), splinted fixed crowns (12.9%, p < 0.01), short implants (22.2 vs. 4.0%, p < 0.01) and when using regenerative surgery (19.2 vs. 3.4%, p < 0.01); greater MBL was observed in maxillary implants (0.25 ± 0.35 vs. 0.11 ± 0.18, p < 0.05), in the anterior region (p < 0.05), in the first 3 years (p < 0.01), in external connection implants (0.72 ± 0.71 vs. 0.19 ± 0.26, p < 0.01) and in short implants (0.38 ± 0.31 vs. 0.2 ± 0.32, p < 0.05). There is greater risk in smokers, patients with past periodontal disease, external connection implants, the use of short implants and when regenerative techniques are used. To prevent MBL and IL, implantologists should be very meticulous in indicating implants in patients affected by these host factors.

The effectiveness of immediate implant placement for single tooth replacement compared to delayed implant placement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To compare immediate implant placement (IIP) to delayed single implant placement (DIP, ≥3 months post-extraction) in terms of implant survival (primary outcome), surgical, clinical, aesthetic, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes (secondary outcomes).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two reviewers independently performed an electronic search in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and Cochrane and a hand search to identify eligible studies up to May 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled studies (NRSs) comparing IIP to DIP with at least 1 year of follow-up were selected for a qualitative analysis and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The search identified 3 RCTs and 5 NRSs out of 2,589 titles providing data on 473 single implants (IIP: 233, DIP: 240) that had been in function between 12 and 96 months. One RCT showed unclear risk of bias, whereas all other studies demonstrated high risk. Meta-analysis showed significantly lower implant survival for IIP (94.9%) as compared to DIP (98.9%) (RR 0.96, 95% CI [0.93; 0.99], p = 0.02). All were early implant failures. A subgroup meta-analysis demonstrated a trend towards lower implant survival for IIP when postoperative antibiotics had not been administered (RR: 0.93, 95% CI [0.86; 1.00], p = 0.07). This was not observed among studies including the administration of postoperative antibiotics (RR: 0.98, 95% CI [0.94; 1.02], p = 0.35). Meta-analyses showed similar probing depth (WMD 0.43 mm, 95% CI [-0.47; 1.33], p = 0.35) and aesthetic outcomes as assessed by the pink aesthetic score (standardized WMD -0.03, 95% CI [-0.46; 0.39], p = 0.88) for IIP and DIP. Data on marginal bone loss were conflicting and highly biased. Soft tissue recession was underreported and available data were highly biased. Patient-reported outcomes were underreported, yet both IIP and DIP seemed well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Immediate implant placement demonstrated higher risk for early implant loss than DIP. There is a need for RCTs comparing IIP to DIP with CBCT analyses at different time points and data on midfacial recession with the preoperative status as baseline. In these studies, the need for hard and soft tissue grafting should also be evaluated.

Influence of Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique on Peri-Implant Tissues; Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial with Three-Year Follow-Up. Part I: Hard Tissues

PURPOSE

The objective of this prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to analyze and compare the clinical behavior of three types of prosthesis supported by single implants in the posterior region after three years functional loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-five implants were divided into three groups according to the type of prosthetic restoration: screw-retained crown (Group GS); cemented crown without finishing line (biologically oriented preparation technique) (Group GBOPT); and conventional cemented crown with finishing line (Group GCC). The clinical behavior of each restoration type was analyzed after 3 years functional loading by analyzing radiographic peri-implant bone loss.

RESULTS

GBOPT obtained the least bone loss (p < 0.01) in comparison with GS and GCC.

CONCLUSIONS

Bone loss around implants is related to the type of prosthetic restoration it supports, whereby cemented BOPT crowns present less bone loss.

Peri-implant marginal bone loss rate pre- and post-loading: An exploratory analysis of associated factors

OBJECTIVES

To perform an exploratory analysis of factors influencing annual rates of peri-implant marginal bone loss (RBL) calculated over different time frames, at implants unaffected by peri-implantitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 154 implants from 86 patients were reviewed at 1.6-6.8 years after placement. Marginal bone levels (MBL) were assessed on intraoral radiographs at three time-points: immediately post-placement, time of loading, and least 1-year post-loading. RBLs (mm/year) were computed using these three time frames and corresponding MBL changes as: RBL placement-loading, RBL loading-review, RBL placement-review. Exploratory ordination of three RBLs, corresponding time durations, and 17 background factors were used for visualization. Hierarchical linear mixed-effects models (MEM) with predictor selection were applied to RBL outcomes. The correlation of actual MBL with MBLs predicted by RBL placement-loading and RBL loading-review was tested.

RESULTS

Median RBL placement-loading was 0.9 mm/year (IQR = 2.02), loading-review was 0.06 mm/year (IQR = 0.16), and overall RBL placement-review was 0.21 mm/year (IQR = 0.33). Among-patient variance was highest for RBL placement-loading (SD = 0.66). Longer time predicted lower RBL in all time frames. Shorter time of loading significantly predicted lower RBL placement-review. Augmentation predicted lower RBL placement-loading, while anterior location and older age predicted lower RBLs placement-loading placement-review. Only MBL projected using RBL placement-loading significantly correlated with actual MBL.

CONCLUSIONS

Exploratory analysis indicated RBL varied with the time duration used for calculation in pre- and post-loading, and overall periods. In each period, RBL declined with increasing time. Earlier loading predicted lower overall RBL. Higher pre-loading RBL predicted worse actual bone level.

Periodontal complications with age

The present literature review on periodontal complications in aging focuses on the diagnosis, etiology and development of periodontal complications as a complete entity. In addition, the review also focuses on some of the common systemic diseases that either may further add to periodontal complications or, as result of anti-inflammatory treatment, limit the expression of periodontal disease. There is no evidence to suggest that clinical methods to provide periodontal therapies have been developed especially for older individuals. There is evidence that aging can be associated with periodontally healthy conditions through life and with a high level of tooth retention and function. Periodontal complications that are difficult to manage are usually associated with concurrent medical diseases and complications, or with socio-economic factors that limit the ability to provide dental care for the aging population. Currently, some systemic medical conditions are managed with anti-inflammatory medications with positive effects, while slowing the progression and expression of chronic periodontitis. The lack of data from clinical studies on how to manage periodontal complications in aging is obvious.

Marginal bone loss around cement and screw-retained fixed implant prosthesis

Background

Implant-supported fixed restorations are considered as the standard treatment for replacement of missing teeth. These can be either screw or cement retained. The success or failure of implant restorations depend upon amount of marginal bone loss (MBL). The present study is to determine the MBL around cement and screw-retained implant prosthesis and to determine various predictors of the MBL.

Material and Methods

A retrospective charts review was conducted at the dental clinics, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi from February 2017 to June 2017 in which 104 implants restorations were assessed using periapical radiographs. MBL was calculated at baseline and at 12 months and the difference was recorded on a proforma. SPSS version 21.0 was used for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics was computed. Generalized estimation equation analysis (GEE) was applied to determine the predictors of MBL. Level of significance was kept at ≤ 0.05.

Results

There were 104 implant restorations belonging to 41 patients. Screw retained prosthesis showed significantly greater MBL than cement retained prosthesis (p-value =0 .018) (irrespective of crowns or fixed partial dentures). Other factors that turned out to be significant predictors of MBL were male gender (p-value= <0.01), age >65 yrs. (p-value=0.028) and sites where bone grafting was performed (p-value=0.003).

Conclusions

Male patients of age >65 yrs. with sites needing bone grafts who were provided with screw retained prosthesis (irrespective of crown or fixed partial dentures) had significantly greater marginal bone loss around implants. Key words:Dental implants, dental prosthesis, implant supported dental prosthesis, alveolar bone loss.

Immediate Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns after Conventional and Ultrasonic Implant Site Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Aim

To compare implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) of immediately loaded single implants inserted by using ultrasonic implant site preparation (UISP) (test) and conventional rotary instrumentation (control).

Methods

Two single implants were inserted for each patient: after randomization, test site was prepared by using an ultrasonic device (Piezosurgery Touch, Mectron, Italy) and control site was prepared by using the drills of the selected implant system (Premium AZT, Sweden & Martina, Italy), until reaching a final diameter of 3 mm in both groups. Identical implants (3.8x11.5 mm) were inserted in all sites at crestal level. Impressions were taken and screwed resin single crowns with platform-switched provisional abutments were delivered with 48 hours. Periapical radiographs were taken at provisional crown insertion (T0), 6 months (T1) and one year (T2) after prosthetic loading to measure MBL. All data were tested for normality and subsequently analyzed by paired samples t-test and forward multiple linear regression.

Results

Forty-eight patients were treated in six centers with the insertion of ninety-six implants (48 test; 48 control). Four implants in four patients failed within the first six months of healing (two in test group; two in control group; no difference between groups). Forty patients (age 60.1±10.7 years; 22 female, 18 male) were included in the final analysis. Mean MBL after six months of loading was 1.39±1.03 mm in the test group and 1.42±1.16 mm in the control group (p>0.05) and after one year was 1.92±1.14 mm and 2.14±1.55 mm in test and control, respectively (p>0.05).

Conclusions

No differences in survival rate and MBL were demonstrated between UISP and conventional site preparation with rotary instruments in immediately loaded dental implants: UISP, with its characteristics of enhanced surgical control and safety in proximity of delicate structures, may be used as a reliable alternative to the traditional drilling systems.

The rate and stability of mandibular block bone graft in recent 5 years

Background

The purposes of the present study were to compare implant stabilities of mandibular block bone graft and bovine bone graft and to evaluate influencing factors for implant stability in mandibular block bone (MBB) graft.

Methods

This retrospective study investigated 1224 cases and 389 patients treated by one surgeon in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of Pusan National University Dental Hospital (Yangsan, Korea) between January 2010 and December 2014. Proportions that MBB graft cases constitute in all implant restoration cases and in all bone graft cases were measured. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were achieved by the same surgeon before loading. The average ISQ values of the experimental groups were compared. In addition, ISQ values of influencing factors, such as age, sex, implant size, and implant placement site, were compared within the MBB group using Osstell^TM Mentor (Osstell®, Göteborg, Sweden). Paired t test and ANOVA were conducted for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05.

Results

Fifty-five percent of all implant restoration cases performed bone graft while MBB cases constituted 34% of all implant restoration cases and 61% of all bone graft cases. Comparing ISQ values according to bone graft materials, the MBB group manifested sufficient implant stability by presenting comparable ISQ value to that of the experimental group without bone graft. Among the reviewed factors, females, mandibular molar regions, and implants in larger diameter displayed greater implant stabilities.

Conclusions

Satisfactory implant stability was accomplished upon administration of MBB graft. Within the limitation of this study, gender, implant site, and implant diameter were speculated to influence on implant stability in MBB graft.

Classification of the Root Position of the Maxillary Central Incisors and its Clinical Significance in Immediate Implant Placement

PURPOSE

The aim was to classify the relationship of the sagittal root positions of the maxillary central incisor to alveolar bone using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

METHODS

CBCT images of 934 maxillary central incisors were retrospectively reviewed included 542 men and 392 women. The sagittal root position in the alveolar bone was classified as buccal, middle, or palatal. The sagittal buccal type was further classified into 3 subtypes: I, II, and III.

RESULTS

The root position type was buccal in 95.4% of the 934 incisors, middle in 4.4%, and palatal in 0.2%. In the buccal type, 47.5%, 44.2%, and 8.3% were subtypes I, II, and III, respectively. There was no significant difference in the major and subtypes of root position between the male and female subjects (both P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In Chinese adults, the predominant type of sagittal root position of the maxillary central incisor is buccal. This classification system is useful in planning the implant site for immediate placement in the maxillary esthetic zone.

Effects of Surface Treatment Modification and Implant Design in Implants Placed Crestal and Subcrestally Applying Delayed Loading Protocol

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of the surface modification and cervical implant design on the bone remodeling in implants installed at the crestal and subcrestal bone level.

METHODS

Ten American Fox Hound of approximately 1 year of age, each weighing approximately 14 to 15 kg, were used for this study. Two different dental implant macrodesign were used: cylindric-conical with 3.5 mm of diameter and 9 in length (implant A) and conical with 2.9 mm of diameter and 9 mm in length (implant B). Two surfaces were used: sandblasting and acid etching (surface 1) and sandblasting and acid etching, then maintained in an isotonic solution of 0.9% sodium chloride (surface 2). Four groups were performed (n = 20 implants): Group A1 (implant A with the surface 1), Group A2 (implant A with surface 2), Group B1 (implant B with surface 1), and Group B2 (implant B with surface 2). The mandibular premolars and molars (P1, P2, P3, M1) were removed and, after 2 months of healing, implants were inserted at the crestal and 2 mm subcrestal position related to the buccal bone level. Analysis was performed at 4 and 8 weeks. Histomorphometry with longitudinal measurements and bone implant contact, bone remodeling and implant stability quotient analysis were realized.

RESULTS

The surface 2 showed to get more close contact between implant and new bone formed after implant placement and more stability surrounding platform both at 4 and 8 weeks. Surface 2 groups and subrestally placed showed to have better results in terms of linear measurements, with less bone loss and soft tissue distance to the IS. The data showed significant differences among the groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Surface modification (surface 2) has shown to be an effective alternative to conventional surface with better results in situations placed subcrestally and combined with implant design.

Evaluation of Implant Collar Surfaces for Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. It is important to understand the influence of different collar designs on peri-implant marginal bone loss, especially in the critical area. Objectives. The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare dental implants with different collar surfaces, evaluating marginal bone loss and survival rates of implants. Methods. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective studies, which evaluated dental implants with different collar surface in the same study. Results. Twelve articles were included, with a total of 492 machined, 319 rough-surfaced, and 352 rough-surfaced microthreaded neck implants. There was less marginal bone loss at implants with rough-surfaced and rough-surfaced microthreaded neck than at machined-neck implants (difference in means: 0.321, 95% CI: 0.149 to 0.493; p < 0.01). Conclusion. Rough and rough-surfaced microthreaded implants are considered a predictable treatment for preserving early marginal bone loss.