Dental Implant Quality Register—A possible tool to further improve implant treatment and outcome

Klinge, Björn; Lundström, Mats; Rosén, Måns; Bertl, Kristina; Klinge, Anna; Stavropoulos, Andreas

doi:10.1111/clr.13268

Cited by 34 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…avoiding wearing a removable prosthesis shortly after the operation). In general, control of all confounders is difficult to achieve in large patient cohorts and establishment of an implant register, as recently suggested (Klinge et al, 2018), may hopefully support a more complete risk factor analysis in the future.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

How old is old for implant therapy in terms of early implant losses?

Bertl

Ebner

Knibbe

et al. 2019

J Clinic Periodontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess, retrospectively, whether older age has an impact on implant osseointegration when compared with younger age.MethodsAll patients ≥65 years old at implant installation, in an university setting over a time‐period of 11.5 years, with complete anamnestic data and follow‐up until prosthetic restoration were included, and any early implant loss (EIL; i.e. lack of osseointegration prior to or at the time‐point of prosthetic restoration) was recorded. Further, one implant, from each of the elderly patients, was attempted matched to one implant in a younger patient (35 to <55 years old at implant installation) from the same clinic based on (a) gender, (b) implant region, (c) smoking status and (d) bone grafting prior to/simultaneously with implant installation. The potential impact of various local and systemic factors on EIL in the entire elderly population, and in the matched elderly and younger patient group was statistically assessed.ResultsFour hundred forty‐four patients ≥65 years old (range 65.1–91.3; 56.8% female) receiving 1,517 implants were identified; 10 patients had one EIL each (implant/patient level: 0.66/2.25%). Splitting this patient cohort additionally into four age groups [65–69.9 (n = 213), 70–74.9 (n = 111), 75–79.9 (n = 80) and ≥80 (n = 40)], EIL was on the implant level 0.41, 0.83, 0.34 and 2.26%, respectively, (p = .102) and on the patient level 1.41, 2.70, 1.25 and 7.50%, respectively, (p = .104); multilevel analysis showed weak evidence of association of increasing age with higher EIL rate (p = .090). Matching was possible in 347 cases, and 5 (1.44%) and 9 (2.59%) EIL in the elderly and younger patients, respectively, were observed (p = .280). EIL could not be associated with any systemic condition or medication intake.ConclusionsElderly patients ≥65 years old presented a similarly low EIL rate as younger patients 35 to <55 years old, while patients ≥80 years old may have a slight tendency for a higher EIL rate. Hence, ageing does not seem to compromise osseointegration, and if at all, then only slightly and at a later stage of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

How old is old for implant therapy in terms of early implant losses?

Bertl

Ebner

Knibbe

et al. 2019

J Clinic Periodontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data may be stored in the registry for its primary purposes. For example, the data sources of Swedish dental implant registry are electronic records that automatically transfer data from patient electronic records [7,19,20] In Finland, data source is self-reported data obtained from dentists or collected by questionnaires for the long-term assessment of dental implants [21][22][23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, for development of successful, effective and stable registries, multidisciplinary collaboration among key stakeholders including clinicians, medical researchers, policy makers and regulatory agencies, epidemiologists, statisticians, patients, healthcare systems, quality monitoring organizations, and health clinics is required [40,43]. In our study, institutions that had developed dental implant registry system included Stockholm County Council in Sweden [7,19,20], The National Institute for Health and Welfare in Finland (THL) [21][22][23] and the Australian Information Commissioner [24]. In this regard, we suggest further collaboration between institutions to enhance the quality of dental implant registry system, data networks, and homogenous structure and content, which allows comparison across countries and regions and promotes oral and dental health.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…sold annually [7]. Improved dental implant properties have led to escalating demand for this material [8].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, it is necessary to store data related to implant properties on a database [16] and facilitate collaboration between a team of dentists [4,17]. Some of the advantages of dental implant registry system include; active learning, improvement of standard care, guideline formulation, clinical research, greater patient participation, promotion of preventive measures, long-term evaluation, and improved quality of life in patients [7,18]. A review of related studies and research websites reveals that no systematic review has ever been conducted on the dental implant registry system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Main Infrastructure for Better Dental Implant Management: A Systematic Review on Dental Implant Registries

Naemi

Barikani

Shahmoradi³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The importance of dental implant registry system has been well documented. However, no systematic review on the dental implant registry system can be found in the literature. Therefore, the aim of this study is to review the dental implant registry system to determine the goals, data elements, reports, data sources, capabilities and institutions that develop dental implant registry system.Methods A systematic study was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase databases. Also, samples of dental implant registry system were searched in Google and were included into the study. For evaluating the dental implant registry system, all English language studies were examined without time limitation. Non-English studies and papers such as conference abstracts were excluded.Results The primary search identified 16905 articles. After eliminating duplicates, full texts of 53 retrieved articles were reviewed by the researchers and finally, 15 studies were included in this review. In this review, the goals of dental implant registry system were determined to be surveillance, complication management and etc. Also, the data elements of dental implant registry system were include patient information, implant information, etc.Conclusion The results of this study provide dentists and other stakeholders with useful dataset on the development of dental implant registry system. It also provides a framework of the goals, characteristics, data elements and reports, data sources, and capabilities of dental implant registry system. The establishment of dental implant registry system will allow the control of complications of dental implants in the future.Systematic review registration CRD42019126424

show abstract

Association between subclinical atherosclerosis and oral inflammation: A cross‐sectional study

Papi

Bianca

Pompa

et al. 2022

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the association between carotid intima-media thickness (c-IMT) values and periodontal and peri-implant diseases in a sample of patients with hypertension. Methods: A total of 151 participants with presence of at least one dental implant in function for >5 years were recruited. Anthropometric measurements, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, ultrasound assessment of carotid arteries (c-IMT and presence of plaque) were recorded and venous blood samples obtained. An oral examination was performed by calibrated examiners to ascertain prevalence and severity of periodontal and peri-implant diseases. Binomial logistic regression was performed to investigate the potential association between various measures of exposure of dental diseases and predictors of cardiovascular risk (c-IMT > 0.9 mm and presence of plaque or their combination). Results: Diagnosis of periodontitis (OR 6.71, 95% CI: 2.68-16.76, P < 0.001), cumulative mucosal/gingival inflammation (Periodontal Screening and Recording score) (OR 1.25, 95% CI:1.12-1.41, P < 0.001), and mucositis (OR 3.34, 95% CI:1.13-9.85, P < 0.05) were associated with c-IMT > 0.9 mm and/or plaque presence independent of age, sex, smoking, 24 h systolic blood pressure and body mass index differences. No statistically significant results were noted for peri-implantitis. Linear regression models confirmed a positive association of cumulative mucosal/gingival inflammation (β = 0.011, SE 0.002, P < 0.001), diagnosis of periodontitis (β = 0.114, SE 0.020, P < 0.001), and peri-implant diseases (β = 0.011, SE 0.002, P < 0.001) with increased c-IMT values. Conclusions:This study confirms a positive association between mucosal/ gingival inflammation and subclinical atherosclerosis assessed by c-IMT values and the presence of carotid plaque in patients with hypertension, independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Future studies are needed to further characterize this relationship.

show abstract

Dental Implant Quality Register—A possible tool to further improve implant treatment and outcome

Cited by 34 publications

References 25 publications

How old is old for implant therapy in terms of early implant losses?

How old is old for implant therapy in terms of early implant losses?

The Main Infrastructure for Better Dental Implant Management: A Systematic Review on Dental Implant Registries

Association between subclinical atherosclerosis and oral inflammation: A cross‐sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About