Does a Severely Resorbed Subantral Ridge Decrease Long-Term Implant Survival Rate with Sinus Floor Augmentation?

Niu, Lixuan; Yu, Han‐Qing; Wang, Juan; Tang, Yuxing; Qiu, Lixin

doi:10.11607/jomi.9453

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Traditionally, an initial RBH of 4–5 mm was recommended for simultaneous implant placement to ensure primary stability from pre‐existing residual bone (Rosen et al, 1999; Wallace & Froum, 2003). As the impact of anatomical factors and the surgical techniques have been continuously updated, increasing studies have demonstrated that if the initial native bone allows primary implant stability, comparable and acceptable survival rates of implants can be achieved for patients with extremely atrophic posterior maxilla (Antonoglou et al, 2018; Niu et al, 2022). When the RBH is approximately 2 mm around the sinus floor, almost all of the maxillary bone content is cortical bone, which plays a major role in the primary stability of implants (Soydan et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical outcomes and risk factor analysis of dental implants inserted with lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation: A 3‐ to 8‐year retrospective study

Zhang,

Zhou,

Jiang

et al. 2024

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo evaluate the 3‐ to 8‐year outcomes of dental implants placed with lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) and to identify factors affecting implant survival.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study was performed by screening all implants placed with LSFA procedures, which were conducted between January 2012 and December 2016. Subantral bone gain (SABG) and apical bone height (ABH) were assessed using panoramic radiographs. The cumulative survival rate of implants was analysed using life‐table analysis and Kaplan–Meier survival curves. The influential risk factors affecting survival were assessed using univariate log‐rank tests and multivariable mixture cure rate model. Implant complications were recorded.ResultsBased on the established criteria, a total of 449 patients (760 implants) were included in this study. In the 3‐ to 8‐year follow‐up (mean ± SD, 5.81 ± 1.33 years), 15 implants in 14 patients failed, with a CRS of 96.81% on an implant basis and 95.07% on a patient basis. A history of periodontitis and poor compliance with supportive periodontal treatment was associated with a significantly higher risk of implant failure at both implant and patient levels. Significant decreases in ABH occurred during each yearly interval except for 3 years. A similar trend has been observed for SABG at 1, 2, 6 and 8 years. The total complication rate was 31.84% on implant basis, with peri‐implant mucositis (21.58%) being the most frequent biologic complication and porcelain cracking (5.00%) being the most common technical complication.ConclusionsImplant with LSFA is a reliable treatment option in atrophic maxilla. A history of periodontitis without regular supportive periodontal treatment was identified as a predictor for implant failure. Slight but significant shrinkage of vertically augmented bone can be observed after implant placement.

show abstract