Clinical evaluation of short and wide-diameter implants immediately placed into extraction sockets of posterior areas: a 2-year retrospective study

Huang, Jiayi; Dongying, Xuan; Wang, Xianfeng; Xie, Baoyi; Liu, Qiong; Zhang, Jincai

doi:10.1563/aaid-joi-d-11-00168.1

Cited by 5 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Survival was defined as implants remaining in situ at the follow-up examinations, irrespective of their conditions. All 20 studies reported survival rates, leading to a weighted mean survival rate of 96.6% with 95% CI (93.5-99.7) [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]. Certain considerations must be taken into account when interpreting the estimates of the individual studies: the study by Atieh et al shows a greater standard deviation, due to the small sample size, only 12 implants [13].…”

Section: Implant Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The success rate was only analyzed in 6 studies [13,16,20,22,28,30] leading to a weighted mean success rate of 93.3% with 95% CI (83.7-100). Excluding again the study of Atieh, the success rate increases to 98.1% with 95% CI (96.1-100) (Fig.…”

Section: Implant Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Excluding again the study of Atieh, the success rate increases to 98.1% with 95% CI (96.1-100) (Fig. 3) [16,20,22,28,30].…”

Section: Implant Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies included in this systematic review that analyzed survival and success rates as well as MBL depending on the type of implant-abutment connection [13,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] reported no statistically significant for implant survival rate (p = 0.511) success rate (p = 0.463) and MBL (p = 0.393) around implants with internal or external connections.…”

Section: Type Of Implant-abutment Connectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Immediate implants are frequently employed in the anterior maxillary area. However, the installation of dental implants simultaneously with tooth extraction can also provide with benefits in the posterior areas with a reduction in time prior the recovery of the masticatory function. Results previously reported in the literature show high-survival and success rates for implants placed in extraction sockets in molar areas; however, this topic has received limited systematic analysis. Material and methods: Electronic and manual literature searches were performed by two independent reviewers in several databases , including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, for articles up to January 2019 reporting outcomes of immediate implants placed in molar areas. Primary outcomes included survival and success rates, as well as marginal bone loss. Secondary outcomes included the influence of implant position, type of implant connection, grafting protocol, flap or flapless approach, implant diameter, surgical phase, presence of buccal plate, and loading protocol. Results: Twenty studies provided information on the survival rate, with a total sample of 1.106 implants. The weighted mean survival rate of immediate implants after 1 year of follow-up was 96.6%, and the success rate was 93.3%. On the other hand, marginal bone loss was 1.29 ± 0.24 mm. Secondary outcomes demonstrated that grafting the gap and the loading protocol have an effect on survival and success rates. Similarly, the presence or absence of the buccal bone affect crestal bone levels. Meta-analysis of 4 investigations showed a weighted mean difference of 0.31 mm ± 0.8 IC 95% (0.15-0.46) more marginal bone loss at immediate implant placement versus implants in healed sites (p < 0.001) I 2 = 15.2%. Conclusion: In selected scenarios, immediate implant placement in molar extraction socket might be considered a predictable technique as demonstrated by a high survival and success rates, with minimal marginal bone loss.

show abstract

Section: Implant Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implant Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Excluding again the study of Atieh, the success rate increases to 98.1% with 95% CI (96.1-100) (Fig. 3) [16,20,22,28,30].…”

Section: Implant Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Type Of Implant-abutment Connectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such patients represent the most complex and high‐risk treatment situation. MDIs 10 mm long may be too long for them, whereas short and wide implants may be too wide for slim residual ridges (Al‐Johany, Al Amri, Alsaeed, & Alalola, ; Jiansheng et al, ; Temmerman, Keestra, Coucke, Teughels, & Quirynen, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

Kovačić

Peršić

Kranjčić

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess peri‐implant bone level, survival and success rates of short (6 or 8 mm long) one‐piece mini‐implants (MDIs) in edentulous patients with extremely resorbed alveolar ridge (interforaminal height <10 mm) rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures and to compare them with patients having standard length MDIs in 1‐year prospective clinical study. Material and methods The Short MDI group consisted of 28 participants with interforaminal height ≤10 mm. Implants being, both, short and slim (short MDIs: 6 or 8 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide) were inserted. The Standard‐MDI group included 35 participants (interforaminal height >13 mm) who received standard length MDIs (10–14 mm long, 2 or 2.5 mm wide). Primary outcomes were assessments of MDI peri‐implant bone level, survival and success rates; secondary outcomes were assessments of peri‐implant tissue, oral hygiene, and prosthodontic maintenance. Results The Short MDI group had mean marginal bone loss (MBL) of 0.26 ± 0.35 mm, 6.4% of failure, and 92.6% of, both, success and survival rates. The Standard‐MDI group had mean MBL of 0.34 ± 0.40 mm, 5% of failure, 95% of survival, and 94.3% success. There were no significant differences in MBL (p = .420), survival (p = .414), and success (p = .571) between the groups. The Short MDI group had significantly less plaque (p = .001) and bleeding on probing (p < .001). Conclusion Within the limitations of this study, short MDIs (6 or 8 mm long) in extremely atrophied mandibles (interforaminal height <10 mm) showed good clinical results in the first year of function.

show abstract

A Systematic Review of Outcomes Following Immediate Molar Implant Placement Based on Recently Published Studies

Ketabi

Deporter

Atenafu

2016

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there are still no published reports from double-blind, randomized, controlled (best quality) clinical trials of immediate molar implant placement, high survival rates have been reported. The present data, however, suggests that there may be an optimal diameter for this implant application. Meta-analysis of the limited bone loss data reported estimated the overall mean cumulative bone loss after at least 1 year to be 0.57 mm.

show abstract

Clinical evaluation of short and wide-diameter implants immediately placed into extraction sockets of posterior areas: a 2-year retrospective study

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A cohort study on short mini‐implants for mandibular overdentures compared to those of standard length

A Systematic Review of Outcomes Following Immediate Molar Implant Placement Based on Recently Published Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About