Prospective clinical trial of dental implants in persons with ectodermal dysplasia

Guckes, Albert D.; Scurria, Mark S.; King, Tonya S.; McCarthy, George R.; Brahim, Jaime S.

doi:10.1067/mpr.2002.127099

Cited by 98 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In total 16 prospective studies [14,18,19,28,35-40,44,45,47,48,50,53] from which 5 were controlled clinical trials [38-40,44,48] and 1 cross-sectional study [45], 23 retrospective studies [15-17,20,23-27,29-34,41-43,46,49,51,52,54] and two case series studies [21,22] were included in present research.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In two studies the effect of HIV was analysed [39,40]. One by one articles were included in evaluating the effect of following diseases and stages: Crohn‘s disease [47], Sjögren’s syndrome [49], ectodermal dysplasia [50] and immunosuppression after transplantation [48]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one study included involving patients with ectodermal dysplasia [50]. The short-term survival data supports successful placing of dental implants in patients with ectodermal dysplasia and congenitally missing teeth with appropriate precautions in the maxilla.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the age of these patients ranged from 8 to 68 years, there was no significant difference in survival of implants among patient age groups. The difference in the survival rates of implants placed in anterior mandible (9%) and maxilla (23%) approached significance [50]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

General Diseases Influence on Peri-Implantitis Development: a Systematic Review

Guobis¹,

Pacauskienė²,

Astramskaitė

2016

JOMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo systematically review the influence of systemic diseases or medications used in their treatment on the dental implant therapy success.Material and MethodsThe search strategy was implemented on the National Library of Medicine database (MEDLINE) (Ovid) and EMBASE electronic databases between January 2006 and January 2016. Human studies with available English articles analysing the relationship between dental implant therapy success and systemic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, AIDS/HIV, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, Crohn’s disease, cardiovascular diseases, scleroderma, Sjögren’s syndrome, lichen planus, ectodermal dysplasia, post-transplantation status, were included in present review according to the PRISMA guidelines. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO system with the code CRD42016033662.ResultsPresent review included forty one retrospective and prospective follow-up studies, case-control studies, case report series and cohort studies. Despite some limitations this study reveals positive results of implantation in most systemic conditions that should be interpreted with caution. Influence of cardiovascular diseases on the dental implantation success should be explored deeply, because of controversial results and likelihood of comorbidity expressed by a history of cardiovascular diseases and periodontitis. There is only a weak relationship with bone density in osteoporosis and implant failure. All the other diseases did not show significant effect on implantation success.ConclusionsRecent studies with low strength of evidence and controversy show that systemic diseases may have potential effect on the success of implantation, but further detailed studies are needed to provide these findings.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

General Diseases Influence on Peri-Implantitis Development: a Systematic Review

Guobis¹,

Pacauskienė²,

Astramskaitė

2016

JOMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…survival [%]Marginal resorpt. [mm]Infra occlusion [mm]Follow-up [y]Risk of biasLedermann [40]1993RetrospectAgenesis, traumaFPD9–18 years344290901003MKearns [41]1999ProspObsED 5–17 yearsFull dentureAll64197.67.8L<6 years2910044.407.8>12 years43296.996.91007.8Thilander [3]2001ProspObsAgen,<18 years traumaSC, FPDAll184710010093.910LIncisors122610010088.20.750.9810Canines481001001000.6010Premolars5131001001000.50.1–0.610Guckes [42]2002ProspObsED 5–18 yearsFull dentureAll51264902LMaxilla21712…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occlusal rehabilitation in patients with congenitally missing teeth—dental implants, conventional prosthetics, tooth autotransplants, and preservation of deciduous teeth—a systematic review

Terheyden

Wüsthoff

2015

Int J Implant Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundImplant patients with congenitally missing teeth share some common charateristics and deserve special attention.MethodsThe PICO question was “In patients with congenitally missing teeth, does an early occlusal rehabilitation with dental implants in comparison to tooth autotransplants, conventional prosthetics on teeth or preservation of deciduous teeth have better general outcomes in terms of survival, success and better patient centered outcomes in terms of quality of life, self-esteem, satisfaction, chewing function?”After electronic database search, a total of 63 relevant studies were eligible, of which 42 qualified for numerical data synthesis, 26 being retrospective studies. A data synthesis was performed by weighted means for survival/success/annual failure rates.ResultsThe mean survival of implants was 95.3 % (prosthesis survival 97.8 %), autotransplants 94.4 %, deciduous teeth 89.6 %, and conventional prostheses 60.2 %. The implant survival in children, adolescents, and adults was 72.4, 93.0, and 97.4 %. Annual failure rates of implants 3.317 %, autotransplants 1.061 %, deciduous teeth 0.908 %, and conventional prostheses 5.144 % indicated better results for natural teeth and more maintenance needs for the both prosthetic treatments. The mean OHIP score was 27.8 at baseline and a mean improvement of 14.9 score points was reported after implant prosthetics. The mean satisfaction rates were 93.4 (implants), 76.6 (conventional prostheses), 72.0 (autotransplants), and 65.5 % (orthodontic space closure).ConclusionsIn synopsis of general and patient-centered outcomes, implants yielded the best results, however, not in children <13 years. Autotransplants and deciduous teeth had low annual failure rates and are appropriate treatments in children and adolescents at low costs. Conventional prosthetics had lower survival/success rates than the other options. Due to heterogeneity and low number of studies, patient-reported outcomes in this review have to be interpreted with caution.

show abstract

References

2012

Pathology of the Hard Dental Tissues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prospective clinical trial of dental implants in persons with ectodermal dysplasia

Abstract: Within the limitations of this study, the results support the continued use of endosteal dental implants in this patient population with appropriate precautions in the maxilla.

Cited by 98 publications

References 9 publications

General Diseases Influence on Peri-Implantitis Development: a Systematic Review

General Diseases Influence on Peri-Implantitis Development: a Systematic Review

Occlusal rehabilitation in patients with congenitally missing teeth—dental implants, conventional prosthetics, tooth autotransplants, and preservation of deciduous teeth—a systematic review

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About