Comparison of implant survival with implants placed in acceptable and compromised bone: a literature review

Abstract

Background Survival rates for conventional dental implant systems are relatively high in normal healthy bone. However, there are subgroups of patients that are at an increased risk of implant failure. In particular, patients with compromised quantity or quality of bone present a significant challenge to the dental implantologist. Objective To perform a review of the literature in an attempt to quantify the relative risk of implant failure in compromised bone compared to good or acceptable bone and to identify whether certain anatomical regions are at greater risk. Search Strategy We conducted a systematic electronic database search of Medline, Cinhahl and the Cochrane Library through March 2006 identifying articles meeting the eligibility criteria. Results We calculated an increased risk of implant failure in compromised bone compared to healthy bone in both the maxilla and the mandible using conventional dental implant systems. Relative risks ranged from 2 to 12 with the highest risk of failure in the maxilla. Conventional systems are often used in combination or after bone augmentation procedures or more innovative methods for stimulating bone growth in patients with compromised bone. These approaches do have their limitations including high costs, the accumulation of the surgical risks, and delayed time to loading. Discussion Quantifying the risk of implant failure in patients with compromised bone should assist the implantologist in treatment decision making and patient counseling. Alternative methods for treating patients with compromised bone include zygomatic and lateral implants, neither of which typically require bone augmentation procedures. More studies are needed to evaluate their safety and efficacy.

The influence of immediately loaded basal implant treatment on patient satisfaction

“…The strongest anchorage obtained with basal implants offers stable occlusal units leading to good chewing function. 12,13,16,18,21 Most of the patients in our study reported a significant improvement in their satisfaction with mastication from average to excellent after basal implant treatment, a finding that matches the findings of S. Ihde and A. Ihde 12,18 and Scortecci 15 and is in accordance with other studies on endo-osseous implant treatment showing improved mastication with implant-supported prostheses. 55−59 Since speech is usually affected by edentulism, improving patients' speech is one of the main purposes of replacing missing teeth.…”

“…These drawbacks increase in the case of severe ridge resorption. On the other hand, several techniques have been advanced in order to optimise the aesthetic and functional outcomes of the prosthetic rehabilitation of patients with severe alveolar ridge resorption including the bone graft procedure, 12,13,18,20 use of short implants, 16 use of 'All-on-4 concept', 13 and utilisation of remote basal bone areas for anchorage such as the cortical bone of the nasal floor and maxillary sinus, pterygoid plate of the sphenoid bone, zygomatic bone, inferior cortex of the mandible, and buccal and lingual cortex of the mandible for basal implants. 12,13,18,20 The main reasons given by our patients for changing from a fixed conventional prosthesis were caries and fracture of the abutment, which is similar to numerous previous studies.…”

The Influence of Immediately Loaded Basal Implant Treatment on Patient Satisfaction

“…Many implant systems have been developed and distributed in the dental market, one of which is the basal implant [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. In this system, the implant is anchored to the basal/cortical bone [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] which is useful in cases of severe alveolar ridge resorption, when bone grafting is prohibited due to the patient's general medical condition and when a more conservative treatment with lower cost is needed [12-14, 16, 20-22]. e BCS ® implant is a special type of basal implant, consisting of one piece that is inserted through a crestal approach, just like the other endo-osseous implants and then anchored deeply inside the basal bone through its horizontal plates [12][13][14]19].…”

“…Although the use of basal implant-supported prosthesis has been documented as an alternative treatment for patients with severe ridge resorption [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22], there is a paucity of knowledge on how this treatment affects patients' satisfaction and quality of life compared with their previous prosthetic treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first study to consider the evaluation of patient satisfaction following fixed immediately loaded basal implant-supported prosthesis.…”

Systemic sclerostin antibody treatment increases osseointegration and biomechanical competence of zoledronic-acid-coated dental implants in a rat osteoporosis model

“…Long-term survival of dental implants depends on the mechanically stable fixation of an implant in the host bone (Branemark et al, 1977). Conditions affecting bone quality and quantity, such as osteoporosis, may limit an implant's clinical success (Ihde et al, 2009;Scully et al, 2007). Postmenopausal osteoporosis is the most common type of osteoporosis.…”