Immediate, non-submerged, root-analogue zirconia implants placed into single-rooted extraction sockets: 2-year follow-up of a clinical study

Pirker, W.; Kocher, Alfred

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2009.07.008

Cited by 84 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

141

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reason(s) for Exclusion Bankoğlu Gungor et al (2014) < 15 patients Becker et al (2015) No MBL measurements Blaschke and Volz (2006) No MBL measurements, retrospective design Borgonovo et al (2010) No MBL measurements, retrospective design Borgonovo et al (2011) No value for mean MBL provided Borgonovo et al (2012) < 15 patients Borgonovo et al (2013a) < 15 patients Borgonovo et al (2013b) < 15 patients Borgonovo et al (2013c) < 15 patients Borgonovo et al (2015) < 15 patients, No MBL measurements Brüll et al (2014) Retrospective design Cionca et al (2015) No value for mean MBL provided Gahlert et al (2013) Retrospective design Kollar et al (2008) No zirconia implants Lambrich and Iglhaut (2008) No MBL measurements, retrospective design Mellinghoff (2006) No MBL measurements, retrospective design Oliva et al (2007) No MBL measurements, retrospective design Oliva et al (2010) No MBL measurements Pirker and Kocher (2008) Case report Pirker and Kocher (2009) < 15 patients, No MBL measurements Roehling et al (2015) Retrospective design Spies et al (2016b) Same cohort in Spies et al (2015a) …”

Section: Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Outcomes of Zirconia Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine the survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) of zirconia dental implants restored with single crowns or fixed dental prostheses. An electronic search was conducted up to November 2015 (without any restriction regarding the publication time) through the databases MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and EMBASE to identify randomized controlled clinical trials and prospective clinical trials including >15 patients. Primary outcomes were survival rate and MBL. Furthermore, the influence of several covariates on MBL was evaluated. Qualitative assessment and statistical analyses were performed. This review was conducted according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. With the applied search strategy, 4,196 titles could be identified. After a screening procedure, 2 randomized controlled clinical trials and 7 prospective clinical trials remained for analyses. In these trials, a total of 326 patients received 398 implants. The follow-up ranged from 12 to 60 mo. Implant loss was mostly reported within the first year, especially within the healing period. Thereafter, nearly constant survival curves could be observed. Therefore, separate meta-analyses were performed for the first and subsequent years, resulting in an implant survival rate of 95.6% (95% confidence interval: 93.3% to 97.9%) after 12 mo and, thereafter, an expected decrease of 0.05% per year (0.25% after 5 y). Additionally, a meta-analysis was conducted for the mean MBL after 12 mo, resulting in 0.79 mm (95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 0.86 mm). Implant bulk material and design, restoration type, and the application of minor augmentation procedures during surgery, as well as the modes of temporization and loading, had no statistically significant influence on MBL. The short-term cumulative survival rates and the MBL of zirconia implants in the presented systematic review are promising. However, additional data are still needed to confirm the long-term predictability of these implants. analyses. In these trials, a total of 326 patients received 398 implants. The follow-up ranged from 12 to 60 months. Implant loss was mostly reported within the first year, especially within the healing period. Thereafter, nearly constant survival curves could be observed. Therefore, separate meta-analyses were performed for the first and subsequent years, resulting in a survival rate of the implants of 95.6% (95%CI:93.3% -97.9%) after 12 months, and thereafter an expected decrease of 0.05% per year (0.25% after 5 years). Additionally, a meta-analysis was conducted for the mean MBL after 12 months, resulting in 0.79 mm of MBL (95%CI: 0.73 mm -0.86 mm).Implant bulk material, implant design, restoration type, the application of minor augmentation procedures during surgery as well as the modes of temporization and loading had no statistically significant influence on MBL.Conclusions: The short-term cumulative survival rates and the MBL of zirconia implants in the presented systemati...

show abstract

Section: Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Outcomes of Zirconia Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, specimens underwent conductive staining, dehydration with graded ethanol, critical-point drying, evaporation coating with tetraosmium, and observation with SEM. 14 …”

Section: Subcutaneous Implantation Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, these ceramic products have already been used clinically in the femoral components of knee joint prostheses and in ankle joint prostheses [9,10]. In other medical fields, ceramics are used as artificial bone to repair cranial and orbital bone defects and as dental and cochlear implants, among other uses [11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biocompatibility and Bone Tissue Compatibility of Alumina Ceramics Reinforced with Carbon Nanotubes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: The addition of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) remarkably improves the mechanical characteristics of base materials. CNT/alumina ceramic composites are expected to be highly functional biomaterials useful in a variety of medical fields. Biocompatibility and bone tissue compatibility were studied for the application of CNT/alumina composites as biomaterials.Methods & results: Inflammation reactions in response to the composite were as mild as those of alumina ceramic alone in a subcutaneous implantation study. In bone implantation testing, the composite showed good bone tissue compatibility and connected directly to new bone. An in vitro cell attachment test was performed for osteoblasts, chondrocytes, fibroblasts, and smooth muscle cells, and CNT/alumina composite showed cell attachment similar to that of alumina ceramic.Discussion & conclusion: Owing to proven good biocompatibility and bone tissue compatibility, the application of CNT/alumina composites as biomaterials that contact bone, such as prostheses in arthroplasty and devices for bone repair, are expected.4

show abstract

“…Perfect implant fit could lead to excellent primary stability, however, it might be responsible for the intermediate term failure, because of the subsequent uniform pressure-induced resorption concerning the entire alveolar surface 4,8,9 simultaneously affecting the thin buccal layer, which is prone to fracture and pressure-induced resorption 4,8,9 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%