Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
Dental implants with a reduced diameter are commonly used where bone width is narrow or in cases of restricted mesiodistal anatomy such as laterally maxillary and mandibular incisors. They could also be a viable alternative to bone augmentation especially in challenging situations such as the posterior regions of the mandible. While it has been shown that it is possible to horizontally augment bone in mandible with different procedures, these techniques are associated with significant postoperative morbidity and complications, can be expensive and technique sensitive, and require long treatment periods. Narrow-diameter implants could be simpler, cheaper, and faster alternative to horizontal bone augmentation in the mandible, if they will provide similar success rates. This cohort study was designed to evaluate whether NDIs (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) could be used to support partially fixed prostheses in posterior mandibles having insufficient bone ridge thickness for placing standard-diameter implants. At 1-year post loading, implant survival rate was 97.6%, the number of complications was low, and the implants lost an average of 0.47 mm of peri-implant bone. The present data are similar to those observed around other implant systems used in the similar condition. Malo et al. [6] reported a 95.1% survival rate after 11 years of function for narrow-diameter implants (3.3 mm diameter) placed in posterior regions of both jaws. The values for marginal bone resorption recorded in this study at 1, 5, and 10 years (not exceeding 0.2 mm/year of bone loss after the first year) are within the accepted standard success criteria for implants. Regarding the implant failures, the majority occurred in the first 6 months of function, following the pattern for standard-diameter implants. In another retrospective study, Anitua et al. [10] observed a survival rate of 97.3% for 2.5 mm diameter implants used as definitive implants for rehabilitation of missing teeth having a follow-up between 3 and 7 years.
Klein et al., in a recent systematic review, reported that the survival rate of implants with a diameter of < 3 mm was higher than 90% with a follow-up time between 1 and 3 years [3]. In another meta-analysis by Ortega-Oller et al., the majority of the analyzed studies (implants less than 3.3 mm in diameter) have also reported a survival/success rate higher than 90% [11]. However, the results of the meta-analysis have shown higher failure rates for implants with a diameter of < 3.3 mm when compared with implants with a diameter of ≥ 3.3 mm. The authors have related this outcome with the fact that NDIs are usually placed in complicated clinical scenario, and they have a higher possibility of fracture.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Background : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Background : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Methods : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Methods : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Results : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Results : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- Discussion : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Conclusions : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- References : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [1]
- References : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study [2]
- Author information : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Ethics declarations : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Rights and permissions : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- About this article : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 1 Features of the subjects included in the study : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124) : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 3 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Table 4 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals in different implants diameters groups (2.75 and 3.25 mm) : Narrow implants (2.75 and 3.25 mm diameter) supporting a fixed splinted prostheses in posterior regions of mandible: one-year results from a prospective cohort study
- Fig. 1. Characteristics of the implants used in the study: a external macro-design of JDIcon Ultra S, 2.75 mm diameter implant and b external macro-design of JDEvolution S, 3.25 mm diameter implant : Narrow implant
- Fig. 2. Case 1: Example of one case involved in the study. a Preoperative view of a partial edentulism in posterior mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was 4 mm. c Four narrow diameter implants were placed and left to a nonsubmerged healing. d Baseline periapical radiograph. e Buccal vieew of the final metal ceramic restoration. f Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading : Narrow implant
- Fig. 3. Example of another case involved in the study. a Preoperative view –premolars and molars are missing in left mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was around 4 mm. c Baseline periapical radiograph. Four narrow diameter implants were placed to restore the area. d Buccal view of the final full-contour zirconia restoration. e Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading : Narrow implant