Clinical Outcomes of Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses: A Retrospective Analysis Considering Patient-Related Factors

Zierden, Karina; Grau, Laura Sophie; Wöstmann, Bernd; Rehmann, Peter

doi:10.11607/jomi.8784

Cited by 2 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The recurrence of a neoplasm in the head and neck area usually means that existing dentures have to be replaced, as a tumor resection will again result in the loss of bone and soft tissue that has to be replaced. This is also observed in other studies who also reported that a tumor recurrence is a main reason for failure [10,33,34]. However, this could be partially confirmed in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…However, there are also authors who reported similar survival times of 90–90.8% after 5 years [ 10 , 43 , 44 ]. Oral rehabilitation with implant-supported dental prostheses is not only the therapy of choice for tumor patients, but also shows good results [ 3 , 4 , 10 – 12 , 15 , 18 , 25 , 27 , 45 ]. This is also confirmed on the basis of the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…In comparison, other studies reported survival times up to 100% after 5 years for implant supported dental prostheses [40][41][42]. However, there are also authors who reported similar survival times of 90-90.8% after 5 years [10,43,44]. Oral rehabilitation with implantsupported dental prostheses is not only the therapy of choice for tumor patients, but also shows good results [3, 4, 10-12, 15, 18, 25, 27, 45].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…If covering of the defect in the maxilla after tumor surgery is not possible for any reason, obturators become necessary [11,12]. Dental implants are often the method of choice for prosthetic treatment after resective surgery in patients with head and neck tumors with good clinical results [3,4,[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, there is no reason why removable dental prosthesis should not be inserted in these patients. Telescopic-retained dental prostheses show excellent results also in patients with head and neck tumors [ 10 ]. Here, too, dental implants are often helpful to attach the prostheses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors—a retrospective cohort study

Zierden

Wöstmann

et al. 2022

Clin Oral Invest

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To investigate how different types of dental prosthesis perform in patients with head and neck tumors. Materials and methods In this retrospective clinical cohort study, the impact of different patient-related factors was analyzed as influencing factors on the survival probability of dental prosthesis using Kaplan–Meier estimate. For analysis, the dental prosthesis was divided into groups: group 1 (fixed dental prosthesis), group 2 (removable dental prosthesis), group 3 (implant-supported dental prosthesis), and group 4 (prostheses anchored using wrought wire clasps and obturators). The incidental aftercare measures were also evaluated. Results Two hundred seventy-nine restorations were observed (mean observation: 2.7 ± 3.0 years, max.14.8 years) out of which 49 (17.6%) had to be replaced during the observation. After 5 years, 100% of group 1 restorations, 79.9% of group 2 restorations, 91.4% of group 3 restorations, and 30% of group 4 restorations were still functional. Four hundred eighty-eight dental implants were observed, of which 77 (15.8%) failed. Conclusions Groups 1, 2, and 3 restorations showed good survival times after 5 years in function, whereas group 4 presented the worst survival times. Group 2 restorations showed the highest amount of necessary aftercare measures. Clinical relevance The current investigation shows that groups 1, 2, and 3 restorations should be preferred in the prosthetic treatment planning of patients with head and neck tumors. A treatment with group 4 restorations should only be considered if no other prosthetic treatment is possible or as temporary treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors—a retrospective cohort study

Zierden

Wöstmann

et al. 2022

Clin Oral Invest

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Metal-Free Alternative “Revolutionary PEKK”: An Emerging Material for Removable and Fixed Prosthesis Usage in Dentistry: A Critical Review

et al. 2023

J. Adv. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polyaryletherketone polymers have been widely used for biomaterials in orthopaedic, trauma, and spinal implants. Polyaryletherketone has three different variants viz: Polyetheretherketone (PEEK), Polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and Polyetherketone (PEK). In this research work, an emergent critical review of the material (PEKK) which are used in removable and fixed prosthesis in dentistry. The following databases were identified in systematic research which comprises certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. The databases are EMBASE, cochrane library, MEDLINE, PUBMED, Ovid MEDLINE, web of science. This study assesses the eligibility screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Many studies were assessed to improve PEKK containing osseointegration, surface modification of PEKK, etc. In animal models, in vivo studies were performed. To the best of my knowledge any author targeted for the evaluation of the removable and fixed prosthesis usage of PEKK as a biomaterial. This review showed that the wide application of PEKK is used in different aspects of dentistry. The PEKK materials in comparison of PEEK have suitable physical, mechanical, and chemical qualities (discussed in details in following sections) and can be employed in a variety of applications, including framework for an implant-supported and crown and bridge fixed prosthesis, endo crowns, restorative material, and dental biomaterial implants. Wider uses in clinical dentistry may also result from modifications and improved material qualities. As PEKK has only lately been used in dentistry and there are little research available, long-term evaluations are required for extensive validation of the same.

show abstract

Clinical Outcomes of Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses: A Retrospective Analysis Considering Patient-Related Factors

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors—a retrospective cohort study

Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors—a retrospective cohort study

Metal-Free Alternative “Revolutionary PEKK”: An Emerging Material for Removable and Fixed Prosthesis Usage in Dentistry: A Critical Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About