Long‐Term Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Hydrophilic Implants: A 10‐Year Study in a Specialist Private Practice

Abstract

AimTo report the 10‐year clinical and radiographic outcomes of implants placed in grafted (GBR) and non‐grafted (no‐GBR) sites in a Swiss specialist private practice using hydrophilic implants with a low surface roughness flange.MethodsFifty consecutively enrolled patients received 159 hydrophilic implants with a low surface roughness flange. A first re‐evaluation was performed 1 year after delivery of restoration (T1). An additional examination was performed at the 10‐year follow‐up (T2) including the assessment of clinical (i.e., periodontal/peri‐implant pockets probing depths (PPD) (mm), full‐mouth bleeding score (%), implant survival rate, mid‐buccal keratinized mucosa (KM) width in mm, and peri‐implant phenotype), and radiographic (i.e., marginal bone level change [ΔMBL]) outcomes. Biological, mechanical and technical complications were also recorded.ResultsOut of the initial cohort, 22 patients (9/40.9% male and 13/59% female) and 63 implants (47 with GBR, 16 without GBR), could be re‐examined at T2. Overall, ΔMBL (T2‐T1) was −0.56 ± 0.96 mm. In the GBR group, ΔMBL were significantly higher at the distal sites compared to the no‐GBR group (−0.75 ± 1.17 mm vs. −0.12 ± 1.29 mm, p = 0.045), however, in the GBR group MBL started at a higher level at T1 but were similar with the no‐GBR group at T2. Implant survival was 100% with only very few technical complications (6.3%). Mean PPD amounted to 3.84 ± 1.00 mm with significantly higher values in the GBR group (3.98 ± 1.08 mm vs. 3.45 ± 0.60 mm; p = 0.016). Nineteen implants (30.1%) were diagnosed with peri‐implant health while 44 (69.9%) presented with peri‐implant mucositis.ConclusionWithin the limitations of this study, favorable clinical and radiographic conditions were recorded around hydrophilic implants with a low surface roughness flange placed in pristine and augmented bone after 10 years in function.