How Do Parameters of Implant Primary Stability Correspond with CT-Evaluated Bone Quality in the Posterior Maxilla? A Correlation Analysis

Do dental implants installed in different types of bone (I, II, III, IV) have different success rates? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the survival rate of implants installed in bone type IV (Lekholm and Zarb, 1995) compared to that of implants installed in bone types I, II, and III.

Material and methods

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA) and was registered in the PROSPERO International Database of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021229775). The PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched through July 2021. The PICO question was: "Dental implants installed in type IV bone have a lower success rate when compared to implants installed in type I bone, II and III?". The established inclusion criteria were: 1) controlled and randomized clinical trials (RCT), 2) prospective and retrospective studies with at least 10 participants with dental implants, and 3) patients with dental implants installed in bone tissue types I, II, III, and IV (Lekholm and Zarb, 1985). The minimum followup duration was 1 year.

Results

After searching the identified databases, 117 articles were selected for full reading and 68 were excluded. Thus, 49 studies were included for qualitative and quantitative analyses. The total number of participants included was 12,056, with a mean age of 41.56 years and 29,905 implants installed. Bone types I, II, and III exhibit a lower implant failure rate when compared to bone type IV.

Conclusion

Dental implants installed in bone types I, II, and III showed significantly higher survival rates than those installed in type IV. The bone type I success rate was not significantly different than that of type II; however, the success rate of bone type I and II was higher than that of type III.

Radiographic alveolar bone assessment in correlation with primary implant stability: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The radiographic examination of alveolar bone using 3D radiographic examination is essential in dental implant treatment planning. Our study aimed to systematically review and quantitatively analyze the correlation between alveolar bone parameters, specifically bone density and cortical bone thickness, assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and/or multidetector computed tomography (MDCT); and primary implant stability (PIS) determined using implant stability quotient (ISQ), Periotest® value (PTV), and insertion torque value (ITV).

METHODS

This review was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42022307245). An electronic literature search was conducted on the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases for papers published until February 2022. The Quality Assessment in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate the estimated average correlation coefficient based on a multilevel random-effects model, followed by subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included in this review, consisting of 17 prospective cohort studies, eight retrospective cohort studies, and one nonrandomized controlled trial. A total of 3109 implants placed in 1171 subjects were analyzed. Twenty-three studies were evaluated using meta-analysis. The alveolar bone condition was significantly correlated with ISQ (r = 0.60; p < .001), IT (r = 0.52; p < .001), and PTV (r = -0.42; p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Alveolar bone condition is significantly associated with PIS. Low bone density and thin cortical bone can lead to low PIS; therefore, modification of treatment planning and surgical procedures might be needed to avoid poor osseointegration.

Three-year observations on the effect of different cusp inclinations on the restoration of short maxillary first molar implants: A randomized controlled trial

Objective: To investigate the effect of different cusp inclination on short implant prosthesis of maxillary first molar after 3 years of weight-bearing in biology and mechanics. Methods: The clinical patients were randomly selected from the database and divided into four groups A, B, C, and D according to the cusp inclination of the maxillary first molar short implant restoration (4.8 mm × 8 mm, Dentium). 20 cases in each group. The cusp inclination was 10 degrees-15 degrees, 15 degrees-20 degrees, 20 degrees-25 degrees, 25 degrees-30 degrees. After 3 years of weight-bearing, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and Florida probe were used to measure and observe the height of alveolar bone (H), periodontal probing depth (PD) and modified sulcus bleeding index (MBI). Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the overall satisfaction of patients, and the mechanical complications of each group within 3 years of implant weight-bearing were counted. Results: The H and PD of group D were 1.09 ± 0.23 and 2.19 ± 0.11 respectively, which were significantly higher than those of group A, B and C (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in MBI between groups A-D (p > 0.05). The VAS scores of group B and group C were 88.36 ± 5.12 and 88.70 ± 4.52 respectively, which were higher than those of group A and group D (p < 0.05). The incidence of food impaction, porcelain collapse and abutment loosening in group D were 40.0%, 25.0% and 15.0% respectively, which were higher than those in group B and C (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The risk of biological and mechanical complications increases after long-term weight-bearing of maxillary first molar short implant prostheses with high cusp inclination. The cusp inclination of short implant prostheses should be designed as low as 25 degrees.

Functional and Patient-Centered Treatment Outcomes with Mandibular Overdentures Retained by Two Immediate or Conventionally Loaded Implants: A Randomized Clinical Trial

This study aims to assess the treatment outcomes (functional and subjective) of mandibular overdentures retained on two implants with or without an immediate loading protocol. In this randomized clinical trial, twenty fully edentulous patients were treated with a mandibular two-implant-retained overdenture and a complete new maxillary denture. In half of the sample, the implants were loaded immediately by means of VulkanLoc^® abutments after emplacement of the implant, but in the counterparts, these VulkanLoc^® abutments were connected to implants two months after the surgery (conventional protocol), and until that time the dentures were retained by healing abutments. Treatment outcomes were assessed at two, six, and twelve months after surgery. Functional outcomes were calculated according to masticatory performance, estimated by the mixed fraction of a two-coloured chewing gum after five, ten, and fifteen chewing strokes, by the occlusal force recorded by pressure-sensitive sheets, and by the bioelectrical muscular activity. The subjective outcomes of the treatment were assessed using both the oral satisfaction scale (visual analogue scale) and the Spanish version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-20). The findings of the present study show that new complete dentures resulted in significant improvements in chewing ability, patient satisfaction, and oral health-related quality of life and that subsequent implant-retained overdentures produced further and faster significant improvements. The loading protocol may influence those positive self-reported outcomes rather than the objective functional evaluations.

Comparison of Implant Stability between Regenerated and Non-Regenerated Bone. A Prospective Cohort Study

Implant stability is one of the main indicators of successful osseointegration. Although it has been measured in numerous studies, there has been little research on implant stability in regenerated bone. The study compares primary and secondary stability between implants placed in regenerated versus native bone and evaluates the influence of bone quality on the results. Sixty implants were placed in 31 patients: 30 implants inserted in native bone (non-regenerated) after a healing period of at least 6 months post-exodontia and 30 inserted in regenerated bone at 6 months after grafting with xenograft. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was used to obtain implant stability quotient (ISQ) values at baseline (implant placement), 8 weeks, and 12 weeks. Statistically significant differences were found between implants placed in regenerated bone and those placed in native bone at all measurement time points (p < 0.05). ISQ values were significantly influenced by bone quality at baseline (p < 0.05) but not at 8 or 12 weeks. Greater stability was obtained in implants placed in native bone; however, those placed in regenerated bone showed adequate primary and secondary stability for prosthetic loading. Bone quality influences the primary but not secondary stability of the implants in both native and regenerated bone.