Results : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
Ninety-eight patients with 207 implants complied with the treatment protocol attended the follow-up.
During the follow-up period, 15 implants failed in 12 patients. Age and gender were not correlated with a lower implant survival. The implant losses occurred in a time range between 0.5 and 39 months following implant placement (mean 7.3 ± 11.1 months). The reasons for implant failure were loss of osseointegration (n = 11), peri-implantitis (n = 2), occlusal trauma (n = 1), and mechanical complication (n = 1). From these 15 failures, 6 implants failed after delivery of the final prosthetic restoration while 9 implants failed without being prosthetically restored. The majority of failures (n = 13) occurred during the first year after placement (Table 2).
Cumulative survival rates (SRs) were 91.5% for all implants (Fig. 1). The remaining 194 implants in 88 patients were evaluated 12 to 77 months (mean 33.9 ± 14.7 months) following implant placement. Two more implants in 2 patients failed in this period.
The survival rate for 93 implants in 45 patients with no RFs was 94.8% whereas it was 94% for 83 implants in 48 patients with only local RFs (log rank, p = 0.618), 81.3% for 14 implants in 6 patients with only systemic RFs (p = 0,173), and 76.5% for 17 implants in 6 patients with both local and systemic risk factors (p = 0.006) (Fig. 2). The survival rate of implants in patients with no RFs compared to those with local and systemic RFs displayed a significant difference.
The implant survival was 91.3% in maxilla (n = 188) while it was 94.7% in mandible (n = 19) (log rank, p = 0.788). One hundred twenty-two implants were placed in the anterior region, 65 in the premolar region, and 20 in the molar region. From the total of 15 implant removals (SR 92.7%), 11 (SR 90.98%) occurred in the anterior region, 3 (SR 95.38%) in the premolar region, and 1 (SR 95.0%) in the molar region, so no significant difference was found regarding implant survival rate between the regions (log rank, p = 0.478). The implant diameter and length did not show any difference in survival rate. Delayed implant placement (n = 153, 91.9%) did not reveal a significant higher survival rate than implants placed immediately into extraction sites (n = 54, 90%) (p = 0.603). Delayed loaded implants (n = 142, 93%) did not show a significant higher survival rate than immediately provisionalized implants (n = 65, 89.3%) (p = 0.935). The treatment concept of immediate implant placement and immediate provisionalization (IPP, n = 30) did not have a negative impact on implant survival (IPP 92.1%, all other implants (n = 177) 91.4%, p = 0.809). Although the implant survival was lower in the group of implants with simultaneous bone grafting (n = 113, 88.1%) compared to those without (n = 94, 95.7%), the difference did not reach the level of significance (p = 0.151).
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- Introduction : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
- Introduction : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [2]
- Material and methods : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
- Material and methods : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [2]
- Material and methods : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [3]
- Material and methods : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [4]
- Results : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
- Results : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [2]
- Discussion : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
- Discussion : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [2]
- Discussion : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [3]
- Discussion : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [4]
- Conclusions : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- References : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [1]
- References : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [2]
- References : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [3]
- References : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [4]
- References : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data [5]
- Acknowledgements : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- Author information : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- Ethics declarations : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- Rights and permissions : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- About this article : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant with high primary stability in patients with local and systemic risk factors—7-year data
- Table 1 Distribution of patients with local and systemic risk factors (Of: Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant)
- Table 2 Clinical parameters and reason for implant failures of 15 implants in 12 patients (Of: Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant)
- Fig. 1. On Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, the cumulative survival rate was 91.5% : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant
- Fig. 2. The cumulative survival rates for the different RF groups revealing a significant difference for patients without any and patients with local and systemic RFs (log rank, p = 0.006) : Retrospective cohort study of a tapered implant
- Abstract : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Background : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Methods : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [1]
- Methods : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [2]
- Results : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [1]
- Results : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [2]
- Discussion : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [1]
- Discussion : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [2]
- Conclusion : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Abbreviations : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- References : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [1]
- References : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [2]
- References : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [3]
- References : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial [4]
- Acknowledgements : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Author information : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Ethics declarations : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Rights and permissions : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- About this article : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implants: a randomized clinical trial
- Table 1 BoP, PI, and PPD mean values at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months (Of: Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant)
- Fig. 1. Electric toothbrush heads: on the left is the one designed for natural teeth, and on the right is the one designed for dental implants : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 2. Patients’ population flow chart : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 3. PI on dental implants. Test values keep reducing after 1 month while control maintains the same level : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 4. PI on natural teeth. After 1 month, the test group showed mild reduction while control a light improvement : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 5. BoP on dental implants. It can be observed how the values keep decreasing after 1 month only in the test group : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 6. BoP on natural teeth. While the control group shows a mild increase between 1 month and 3 months, the test group values decrease during all the duration of the study : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 7. PPD on dental implants. No significant differences appreciable : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant
- Fig. 8. PPD on natural teeth. No significant differences appreciable : Effectiveness and compliance of an oscillating-rotating toothbrush in patients with dental implant