Survival rate and potential influential factors for two transitional implant systems in edentulous patients: a prospective clinical study

Heberer, Susanne; Hildebrand, Detlef; Nelson, Katja

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02166.x

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it has been suggested that failure rate increases as age increases because of decreased bone density caused by bone resorption exceeding osteogenesis25, there was no increased risk related to age in this study as well as in the study of Smith et al26. There was no difference in risk between males and females, as previously determined by Heberer et al27. Renouard and Nisand28 reported that, by avoiding countersink or under-preparation at sites where the bone substance was poor, there was no difference in the success rate between rough-surface implants that were greater than 10 mm and less than 10 mm.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The seven-year cumulative survival rate of Osstem implants

Kim

Yun

et al. 2014

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis study was performed to analyze the cumulative survival rate of Osstem implants (Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.) over a seven-year period.Materials and MethodsA total of 105 patients who had 467 Osstem implants that were placed at the Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (Seongnam, Korea) from June 2003 through December 2005 were analyzed. The life table method and a cross-tubulation analysis, log rank test were used to evaluate the survival curve and the influence that the prognostic factors. The prognostic factors, i.e., age and gender of patients, diameter and length, type of implants, bone graft history and loading time were determined with a Cox proportional hazard model based on logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe seven-year cumulative survival rate of Osstem implants was 95.37%. The Cox proportional hazard model revealed that the following factors had a significant influence on survival rate; increased diameter, reduced prosthetic loading period and performance of bone grafting.ConclusionThe osstem implants showed satisfactory results over the seven-year study period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The seven-year cumulative survival rate of Osstem implants

Kim

Yun

et al. 2014

J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The total survival was 82% but primary stability appeared to be a significant factor in implant survival. However, gender, type of suprastructure, tooth status of the antagonistic jaw and implant location did not affect their survival . The importance of primary stability was also obvious from the results of a study, based on removal torque tests, that used four provisional implants in 31 patients .…”

Section: Immediate Loading Of Complete Fixed Prosthesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immediate loading in partially and completely edentulous jaws: a review of the literature with clinical guidelines

Bruyn¹,

Raes²,

Östman³

et al. 2014

Periodontology 2000

131

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of immediate loading was a paradigm shift in implant dentistry as it was previously believed that an unloaded period was essential for bone healing in order to promote osseointegration. However, this belief could not be confirmed by clinical studies or by human histology. Hitherto, numerous reports have been published on immediate loading in various indications. An important factor for success is primary implant stability. The latter can be improved by adapting drilling protocols to enhance lateral compression of the bone and by using tapered implant designs with apical thread fixation. To some extent, the use of implants with a microrough surface and rigid splinting may compensate for suboptimal stability. It is important to avoid fracture of the provisional restoration at all times as this may result in local overloading and implant failure. Also, unevenly distributed occlusal contacts may contribute to failure and therefore occlusion ought to be evaluated at every occasion, especially during the early phase of healing. Taking these aspects into account, immediate loading in the fully edentulous mandible by means of an overdenture has been shown to be predictable in terms of implant survival (94.4-100%). However, the procedure may result in additional costs as a result of the need for repeated relining. In addition, the scientific basis for this treatment concept in the maxilla is very scarce. Immediate loading in the fully edentulous jaw by means of a fixed prosthesis is a well-documented treatment concept. In the mandible, three implants have been shown to be insufficient, given the failure rate of up to 10%. With at least four implants a failure rate of 0-3.3% may be expected. In the maxilla, four to six implants could be too limited, given the failure rate up to 7.2%. Increasing the number of implants may reduce implant failure to 3.3%. Provisional fixed prostheses are particularly prone to fracture in the maxilla and hence reinforcement is warranted. Immediately loaded single implants have lower survival rates, of 85.7-100%, with no clear impact of occlusal contact. In fact, a meta-analysis demonstrated a five times higher risk of failure for immediately loaded single implants when compared with delayed loading. No study showed superior soft-tissue preservation or esthetics following immediate loading of single implants compared with other loading protocols. However, this finding may not imply that a provisional implant crown becomes redundant when soft-tissue conditioning is deemed necessary. Taking into account earlier factors for success, immediate loading in the partially edentulous jaw by means of a fixed prosthesis seems predictable in terms of implant survival (95.5-100%). However, there are no studies with data on soft-tissue parameters, esthetic aspects or patient-centered outcomes, and the available studies mainly relate to the load-carrying part of the dentition. Clinical studies focusing on these aspects of treatment outcome are clearly needed. High patient satisfaction is the ...

show abstract

“…Most of the time, these successes should be related to a multifactorial condition, including the quality and quantity of bone at the recipient site (associated with the immediate stabilization process), accurate treatment planning, proper oral hygiene, and, not less important, the characteristics of the implants and components used for restoration (Heberer et al. ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%