Survival Rates and Clinical Outcomes of Implant Overdentures in Old and Medically Compromised Patients

Single lateral implant for mandibular overdentures as a fallback solution or a viable treatment alternative: Four case reports

This report of four clinical cases aims to illustrate the use of a lateral implant as a solution for implant overdentures in the mandible in different clinical situations. The first two cases describe the clinical situations of patients wearing two-implant mandibular overdentures until the failure of one of the implants, one due to implant loss and the other due to a fracture of an abutment screw, and how the conditions were managed. The third case illustrates the placement of a single implant to retain an overdenture, where a midline implant, as originally planned, was not feasible due to anatomic reasons. The final case describes the use of a lateral implant to support and retain a single-implant mandibular overdenture. The four cases demonstrate that a single lateral implant can be utilized as sole retention in cases of a failing contra-lateral implant and as an alternative to a single implant in the midline.

Full Arch Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation in Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: A 7-Year Follow-Up Prospective Single Cohort Study

Aim: The rising average age increases edentulous cases, demanding more implant-prosthetic rehabilitation, with cardiovascular diseases being significant factors. This study compared healthy patients (CG = Control Group) and those with cardiovascular disease (TG = Test Group) for implant survival, Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), peri-implant tissue level parameters as Periodontal Screening and Recording (PSR), Plaque Index (PI), Bleeding on Probing (BoP) Peri-implant Probing Depth (PPD), and surgical complications. Smoking impact on both groups and medication influence in the TG were secondary outcomes. Patients underwent full-arch implant prosthetic rehabilitation. Methods: Implant survival rate, MBL, and surgical complications were recorded during the monitoring period (7 years), while peri-implant parameters were assessed at the end of the observational time. A total of 26 and 28 CG and TG patients were recruited, respectively. Results: A total of 128 implants were placed in CG, while 142 in the TG. Implant survival and MBL showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, peri-implant parameters were more unfavorable in TG. The only significant surgical complication was higher bleeding rates in the TG (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Cardiovascular patients showed similar implant survival and MBL but had adverse peri-implant parameters and increased bleeding rates. Higher smoking levels may relate to unfavorable implant outcomes. Further investigation is needed on drug impact with larger samples.

Implant-supported prostheses in patients with special needs: A systematic literature review of protocols and outcomes

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Implant-supported prostheses for individuals with special needs have been considered high-risk because of the prevalence of poor oral hygiene and parafunction in this population; however, systematic evidence on protocols and outcomes is scarce.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize implant procedures and outcomes for the special needs population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodological framework. Data collected included patient information, location and number of implants, surgical and prosthetic procedures, behavior support techniques, postoperative follow-up, complications, and criteria for outcome assessment. Survival rates were pooled for quantitative analysis, and a separate analysis pooling data from groups of special needs patients that present similar risks was undertaken.

RESULTS

The qualitative analysis included 79 studies involving 759 patients and 2269 implants. The quantitative analysis included 65 studies concerning 666 patients with special needs and 1886 implants. The overall weighted implant survival rate was 95.4%, with a mean follow-up duration of 40.7 ±29.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In individuals with special needs considered suitable for implant-supported prostheses by their clinician, implant survival rates were similar to those reported in the general population. (J Prosthet Dent xxxx;xxx:xxx-xxx).

A 10-year survival rate of tapered self-tapping bone-level implants from medically compromised Korean patients at a maxillofacial surgical unit

BACKGROUND

The 10-year survival rate of dental implants in healthy subjects is 90-95%. While in healthy individuals, dental implants have become commonplace to solve problems of edentulism, whether dental implant treatment is optimal in patients with systemic disease remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to investigate the clinical outcomes of tapered, sand-blasted, and acid-etched internal submerged dental implants installed in medically compromised patients in our maxillofacial surgical unit.

METHODS

A total of 1019 Luna® dental implants were placed in 333 patients at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates after 10 years of follow-up were computed for healthy vs. medically compromised patients.

RESULTS

The 10-year follow-up survival rate of 1019 Luna® dental implants in the Korean maxillofacial surgical unit was 97.0% with a mean follow-up of 41.13 ± 35.13 months (0-120 months). The survival rate was 97.0%, in which 31 implants were failed during the follow-up. Cumulative 10-year implant survival rates were 99.4% in healthy individuals without systemic disease and 95.9% in patients with systemic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable success and survival rates were achieved with those of implants in healthy patients. Preoperative general health assessments including laboratory test results and checking the previous medication records are essential in diagnosing any unrecognized conditions for improved implant success rates in medically compromised patients.