Long‐term outcomes of narrow diameter implants in posterior jaws: A retrospective study with at least 8‐year follow‐up

Shi, Junyu; Feng-yuan, XU; Liu, Zhuang; Gu, Yun; Qiao, Shuqing

doi:10.1111/clr.13046

Cited by 42 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This might explain the significantly higher technical complication rates in SC group. These results corroborate with the study by Shi and colleagues that showed higher percentage of technical complications occurring in SC versus splinted restorations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…No significant difference in PBL was found between single and splinted crowns ( P = 0.78). This outcome corroborated with a previous clinical studies with 10 and 8‐year follow up . It was reported that the MBL was 1.2 mm in splinted group and 1.3 mm in nonsplinted group at 10‐year examination.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The findings of the present study demonstrates no implant fracture among all 78 NDIs. The results of the previous meta‐analyses which investigated 5‐year dental implant fracture rates was found to be only 0.08% and 0.5% for SC and splinted crowns, respectively . This might indicate that ITI implants with a diameter of 3.3 mm may show predictable outcomes in posterior mandible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Al‐Aali

ArRejaie

Alrahlah

et al. 2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Studies assessing and comparing clinical and radiographic peri‐implant status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single crowns (NDISCs) and splinted crowns (NDISPs) are scarce. Objective The aim of this retrospective study was to estimate and compare complication rates, patient satisfaction, peri‐implant status and peri‐implant bone loss (PBL) of NDISCs and NDISPs. Materials and Methods Patients receiving narrow diameter implants (NDIs) in the posterior mandible were assessed. Technical complication and patient satisfaction were recorded. Clinical peri‐implant plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), probing depth (PD) and PBL were assessed. Technical complications and patient satisfaction were recorded. Log‐rank test was computed to evaluate the influence of prostheses type and NDIs location on technical complications. P‐value less than 0.05 was regarded as significant. Results Seventy‐eight patients (43 male and 35 females) agreed to follow up. The mean follow‐up duration of the patients was 3.6 years. A total of 102 (43 NDISCs and 59 NDISPs) NDIs with moderately rough surfaces were included. No significant differences in PI, BoP, or PD were observed between NDISCs and NDISPs. The average PBL score was 1.17 (range: 0.03‐4.15) at implant level and 1.14 (range: 0.03‐4.14) at patient level. Seven implants and three patients showed peri‐implantitis. The rates of technical complication of single crowns were significantly higher than those of splinted crowns (P = 0.036). PBL was significantly higher in molar sites than those in premolar sites (P = 0.041). A total of 67 patients (85.9%) were satisfied with the esthetics of the crowns, while a total of 59 patients (75.6%) were satisfied with the function of the crowns. Conclusion NDISCs and NDISPs offer high patient satisfaction and tolerable complication rates. Peri‐implant conditions and peri‐implant bone levels were comparable around NDISCs and NDISPs. However, bone loss of implants was higher in molar sites than those implants in premolar sites.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Al‐Aali

ArRejaie

Alrahlah

et al. 2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results are comparable to the overall long‐term survival rate for implant‐supported fixed prostheses reported in previous studies . Shi et al also indicated a similar high survival rate (96.9%) for SDIs in posterior jaws after 10 years.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Retrospective study on the clinical outcomes of small‐diameter implants supporting fixed prostheses without bone augmentation in the posterior region after 2 to 12 years

Zhang

2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Small‐diameter implants (SDIs: diameter <3.5 mm) are often chosen as an alternative to bone augmentation in clinical practice, but the scientific evidence regarding SDI application in the posterior area remains deficient. Purpose To evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of SDIs supporting fixed prostheses without bone augmentation in the posterior region, and to analyze the potential influencing factors related to SDI failures. Materials and Methods Clinical and radiographic data of 243 SDIs in 156 patients were retrospectively assembled after 2 to 12 (mean 4.75) years of follow‐up. Implant and prosthesis failures, mechanical and biological complications, and radiographic marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated. The influence of patient/implant characteristics and prosthetic design on SDI failures was investigated. Results Five implants in five patients failed, contributing to 10‐year cumulative survival rates of 97.9% on an implant‐based analysis and 96.8% on a patient‐based analysis. Biological complications and mechanical complications were detected in 22 (9.1%) and 31 (12.8%) of implants, respectively. No implant fracture was detected. Peri‐implant MBL during 10 years was 0.60 ± 0.90 mm on average. The implant type (bone‐level or tissue‐level) was the only factor that significantly influenced SDI failures. Conclusion SDIs supporting fixed prostheses in the posterior region achieved predictable long‐term clinical outcomes. However, tissue‐level titanium SDIs should be avoided where possible.

show abstract

“…(2017) analyzed the implants retrospectively with a start of the measurement after 3 years and reported all losses before 5 years. Also, the other two papers showed a downhill Kaplan–Meier survival rate in relation to follow‐up time (Meyle et al., 2014; Shi et al., 2018). It seems therefore appropriate to conclude that implants do fail over time, although in small numbers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this critical review was to evaluate whether commonly used biologic diagnostic parameters correspond to implant survival and peri‐implantitis prevalence.Materials and methodsPublications from 2011 to 2017 were selected by an electronic search using the Pubmed database of the US National Library of Medicine. Prospective and retrospective studies with a mean follow‐up time of at least 5 years and reporting prevalence of peri‐implantitis as well as mean bone loss and standard deviation were selected. The correlation between reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis and reported implant survival, mean follow‐up time, mean bone loss, mean probing depth, and mean bleeding on probing was calculated. Mean bone loss and standard deviation were used for estimation of proportion of implants with bone loss exceeding 1, 2, and 3 mm.ResultsFull‐text analysis was performed for 255 papers from 4,173 available ones, and 41 met all the inclusion criteria. The overall mean weighted survival rate was 96.9% (89.9%–100%) and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis ranged between 0% and 39.7%, based on 15 different case definitions. The overall weighted bone loss was 1.1 mm based on 8,182 implants and an average mean loading time ranging from 5 to 20 years. No correlation was found between mean bone loss and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The estimated prevalence of implants with bone loss above 2 mm was 23%. The overall weighted mean probing depth was 3.3 mm, and mean weighted bleeding was 52.2%. Only a weak correlation was found between survival and function time (r = −0.49). There was no relation between the probing depth or bleeding and the mean bone loss, mean follow‐up time, and reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis.ConclusionBiologic parameters mean probing depth and mean bleeding on probing do not correlate with mean bone loss and this irrespective of follow‐up. Case definition for peri‐implantitis varied significantly between studies indicating that an unambiguous definition based on a specified threshold for bone loss is not agreed upon in the literature.

show abstract

Long‐term outcomes of narrow diameter implants in posterior jaws: A retrospective study with at least 8‐year follow‐up

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term survival, complications, peri-implant conditions, marginal bone loss, and patient satisfaction of fixed dental prostheses supported by narrow diameter implants (NDIs) in the posterior jaws.

Cited by 42 publications

References 16 publications

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Retrospective study on the clinical outcomes of small‐diameter implants supporting fixed prostheses without bone augmentation in the posterior region after 2 to 12 years

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About