Analysis of trends in implant therapy at a surgical specialty clinic: Patient pool, indications, surgical procedures, and rate of early failures—A 15‐year retrospective analysis

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the patient population over a 3‐year period and to compare it to observations of the population at the same clinic over a period of 15 years. Material and Methods Records of patients receiving dental implants in the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology, University of Bern, between January 2014 and December 2016 were analyzed and then compared with data from patients treated between 2002 and 2004 and between 2008 and 2010. Patients were analyzed for demographics and for indications for therapy, as well as for presence or absence and type of complications. Inserted implants were analyzed for type, length, and diameter, as well as for the number and type of associated tissue regeneration procedures. Results Analysis revealed a continuous linear increase in the average age of patients seeking implant treatment. The most common indication for implant therapy was a single‐tooth gap (STG) (50.5%), followed by distal extension situations (22.3%) and extended edentulous gaps (20.5%). A total of 60.8% of implants placed needed some type of bone augmentation, and 83.5% of implants placed in the anterior maxilla required simultaneous augmentation. Staged guided bone regeneration (GBR) was only necessary in 7% of the cases. Implant failure rates remained low at 0.6%, with postoperative hematomas being the most common postoperative complication (13.4%). Conclusions The rising demand for dental implants continues as the patient population ages. Single‐tooth gaps remained consistently the most common indication for implant therapy in recent years. Proper case selection and evidence‐based surgical protocols are essential for high success rates.

The risk factors of early implant failure: A retrospective study of 6113 implants

“…In this study, the early implant failure was defined as implant failure before the placement of final prosthesis 5 . Implant position was categorized as in anterior jaw (canine to canine) and in posterior jaw (premolars and molars) 10 …”

“…Since 1980s, there have been a series of studies investigating the early implant failure, with prevalence reported ranging from 0.3% to 5.8% at implant level 3‐7,9‐14 . However, a huge sample size divergence exists in previous studies (ranging from 186 patients to 30 959 implants), which jeopardizes the consistency of the reported conclusion.…”

Thermal effects of various drill materials during implant site preparation—Ceramic vs. stainless steel drills: A comparative in vitro study in a standardised bovine bone model

“…During the past decades, implant‐supported treatment solutions have become a predictable and viable option for prosthetic rehabilitation of toothless and partially edentulous patients. In this respect, titanium dental implants have been well documented over a long period of time and are widely accepted as the gold standard in contemporary dental implantology (Buser et al., 2012; Chiapasco et al., 2020; Chrcanovic et al., 2020; Ducommun et al., 2019; Jung et al., 2012; Pjetursson et al., 2012). Regardless of the reported success rates for dental implants, the implications of implant failure can be both medically and financially challenging (Mardinger et al., 2008).…”

The Oxidative Response of Human Monocytes to Surface Modified Commercially Pure Titanium

“…The use of endosseous dental implants to support restorations replacing missing teeth has become well established since the introduction of titanium dental implants ( 1 , 2 ). The successful incorporation and rigid fixation of an implant within the surrounding bone was defined as osseointegration ( 3 ).…”