Open hour: senin - sabtu 09:00:00 - 20:00:00; minggu & tanggal merah tutup
Retrospective analysis of 10,000 implants from insertion up to 20 years—analysis of implantations using augmentative procedures

Discussion : Retrospective analysis of 10,000 implants (1)

author: Wolfram Knöfler,Thomas Barth,Reinhard Graul,Dietmar Krampe | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID

Discussion

The retrospective analysis presented here evaluates implants inserted in three different private practices with or without augmentation procedures. Treatments were performed according to the standard protocols applied in the private practices. More than 10,000 implants were inserted in various indications and were followed up to 20.2 years from the day of implant insertion. The overall implant survival rate was 95.5%. When only single-crown implants were evaluated, the absolute survival rate increased to 98.8%. Various reviews have reported about the implant survival similar to the results found here.

In our analysis, survival of the 10,158 implants analysed was slightly but significantly higher in augmented bone than in pristine bone (96.3 vs. 94.3%). This might result from an increased mineral density, as usually observed after augmentation, and the concomitant higher bone-to-implant contact. High number of implants analysed here allowed suited statistical analysis despite of patient- and implant-specific variations. According to the statistical results of survival curves, the hypothesis of no difference might be withdrawn in favour for augmented bone indicating a statistically significant positive effect of grafting on implant survival. However, small difference in absolute numbers should be carefully evaluated for clinical relevance. Previously, published studies regarding implant survival between augmented and non-augmented sites are inconclusive. In one retrospective analysis which included 12,737 implants in 4206 patients, 59.7% of the implants were inserted using bone augmentation or bone expanding procedures. The authors did not find a significant difference between the Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival rates among grafted and non-grafted sites. In a recent review which included 108 articles of all evidence levels, Jensen and Terheyden found a high level of evidence that survival rates of implants in augmented bone are very similar to the ones of implants in pristine bone. In another review, Aghaloo et al. reported similar or even better results for implants in augmented sites. 

 

Serial posts:


id post:
New thoughts
Me:
search
glossary
en in