Repeated failure of implants at the same site: a retrospective clinical study

Abstract

Background Implants are becoming the first choice of rehabilitation for tooth loss. Even though they have a high success rate, failures still occur for many reasons. The objective of this study is to analyze the reasons for recurring failure at the same site and the results of re-implantation. Methods Thirteen patients (11 males and 2 females, mean age 60 ± 9.9 years) who experienced implant surgery failure at the same site (same tooth extraction area) two or more times in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, between 2004 and 2017 were selected. The medical records on a type, sites, diameter, and length of implants; time and estimated cause of failure; and radiographs were reviewed. Data were collected and analyzed retrospectively, and the current statuses were evaluated. Results A total of 14 implants experienced failure in the same site more than two times. Twelve implants were placed in the maxilla, while 2 implants were placed in the mandible. The maxillary molar area was the most common site of failure (57.1%), followed by the mandibular molar, anterior maxilla, and premolar areas (14.3% each). The first failure occurred most commonly after prosthetic treatment (35.7%) with an average period of failure of 3.8 months after loading. Ten cases were treated as immediate re-implantation, while the other 4 were delayed re-implantation after an average of 3.9 months. The second failure occurred most commonly after prosthetic treatment (42.9%), with an average of 31 months after loading; during the healing period (42.9%); and during the ongoing prosthetic period (14.3%). In 3 cases (21.4%), the treatment plan was altered to an implant bridge, while the other 11 cases underwent another implant placement procedure (78.6%). Finally, a total of 9 implants (64.3%) survived, with an average functioning period of 60 months. Conclusions Implants can fail repeatedly at the same site due to overloading, infection, and other unspecified reasons. The age and sex of the patient and the location of implant placement seem to be associated with recurring failure. Type of implant, bone augmentation, and bone materials used are less relevant. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40902-019-0209-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical feasibility and benefits of a tapered, sand-blasted, and acid-etched surfaced tissue-level dental implant

“…The results are in accordance with other studies where the failure rate was high in the maxilla and in the molar regions. This is affected by several factors such as the poor quality and quantity of the bone and the high degree of occlusal loading in the molar regions [ 19 – 21 ]. The success rate of this implant system during the 5-year follow-up period was 98.1%.…”

Early crestal bone loss around implants placed at previously failed sites compared with initially integrated implants: A retrospective cohort study

“…All implant failures would occur due to loss of osseointegration except for implant fracture, but a direct cause for loss of osseointegration is not always identifiable 21 . Infection and its related symptoms, such as pain, swelling, and bone loss, were reported as the reason for early implant failure, and peri‐implantitis and mobility were reported as the reason for late implant failure in this study.…”

Prosthodontics Using Removable Platform Switching Technologies (Multiunit, On1) as Exemplified by Conical Connection Implant Systems for Early and Immediate Loading

“…Numerous manipulations from the moment of uncovering the implant to the final prosthetics lead to additional microtrauma of the bone area around the implant and the emergence profile [ 12 , 13 ]. In some places, the provisional prosthesis puts uncontrolled pressure on the peri-implant tissues, which causes rupture of hemidesmosomal junctions [ 14 ].…”