Multicenter retrospective study of cement-retained implant-supported anterior partial prostheses: success and restoration evaluation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate implant success and restorative complications of cement-retained implant-supported anterior partial prostheses in Jordan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of all implants with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were used to support fixed, cement-retained restorations from April 2000 until March 2007. The cement-retained implants were loaded with either single- or multiple-tooth replacements. The Fisher exact test was performed to test the presence of any statistically significant difference in success concerning gender or arch of placement. RESULTS: Eighty-seven implants were placed in the anterior region of the mandible or maxilla in 49 patients at multiple clinical practices in Jordan. The age of the patients ranged from 17 to 85 years. Eighteen implants were placed in the mandible and 69 in the maxilla. Three maxillary implants in 2 male patients had 3-mm horizontal bone loss. Those 3 implants are still functioning and were considered surviving implants but not successful implants. Therefore, the implant cumulative survival rate for both arches and genders was 100%. The implant cumulative success rate was 95.78%. Three crowns (maxillary) were dislodged. No significant differences were revealed regarding gender or arch of placement (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Cement-retained implants exhibited high survival and success rates among a Jordanian population.

Multicenter retrospective study of ITI implant-supported posterior partial prosthesis in Jordan.

PURPOSE: The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate success and restorative problems of ITI (ITI Dental Implant System, Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) implant-supported posterior partial prostheses in Jordan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred forty-one ITI implants were placed in the posterior region of the mandible or the maxilla in 66 patients at multiple clinical practices in Jordan. The age of the patients ranged from 17 to 85 years. The implants were retrospectively analyzed from the first date of placement in September 1999 until May 2006. Eighty-three implants (58.87%) were placed in the mandible, and 58 (41.13%) in the maxilla. The implants were loaded with either cement-retained single- or multiple-tooth replacements. RESULTS: Three maxillary implants of two male patients have been lost (2.13% of the total and 5.12% of the maxillary implants). Failed implants were of wide-neck type with 6-mm lengths. Moreover, in another two male patients, two single implants at the maxillary premolar region exhibited significant bone loss from the buccal side of the implant surface (2-mm bone resorption). Those two implants are still functioning and were included in calculating the survival rate but not the success rate. Therefore, the cumulative survival rate for both arches and genders was 97.87% and that for male patients in the maxillary region was 94.88%. The cumulative success rate for both arches and genders was 96.45% and that for the maxillary region was 86.21%. The corresponding rates concerning implants in female patients and the posterior mandible of both genders were 100% for both survival and success rates. Only one crown (mandibular) and another two abutment bridge (maxillary) were decemented in different patients (2.13%). CONCLUSIONS: The survival and success rates of implants placed in male patients and in the maxilla were lower than that of implants placed in female patients and in the mandible. Cement-retained restorations showed minimal complications.