Maxillary Implant-Supported Overdentures: Mechanical Behavior Comparing Individual Axial and Bar Retention Systems. A Cohort Study of Edentulous Patients.

Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods: This prospective study assessed patients presenting complete maxillary edentulism, rehabilitated by means of implant-supported overdentures (n = 20), 10 with Locator® axial retention (ODA group) and 10 with overdentures on bars (ODB group). Patients also completed a questionnaire to determine their satisfaction with treatment. Results: The mean follow-up time in both groups was 11.4 years, with follow-up times in both groups ranging from 5 to 14 years. The ODA group suffered mechanical complications such as retention loss, need for nylon retention insert changes, resin fracture, and need for relining. In the ODB group, prosthetic dental wear, screw loosening, and complete prosthetic failure were more common. A total of 19 implants failed (23.8%); of these, 11 were in the ODA group (failure rate = 27.5%) and eight in the ODB group (failure rate = 20%). The patient satisfaction questionnaire obtained a mean score of 7.9 out of 10 in the ODA group, and 9.75 in the ODB group. Conclusions: in rehabilitations of edentulous maxillar by means of implant-supported overdentures, both the systems assessed were shown to be effective in the medium to long term. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with the treatments received.

An International Survey among Prosthodontists of the Use of Mandibular Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the use of implant-supported overdentures (IOD) and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (IFDP) in patients with edentulous mandibles among international prosthodontists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent by e-mail to all clinically active prosthodontists in the International College of Prosthodontists with questions related to implant treatment of the edentulous mandible performed in 2015. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen prosthodontists from 33 countries responded to the questionnaire. The vast majority of the responding prosthodontists was faculty or worked in private practice, and the great majority had performed treatment with mandibular implant-supported dental prostheses; however, two thirds of the respondents reported that <20% of the implant patients in their clinic had received treatment related to edentulous mandibles. The majority reported using 2 implants (84%), while 13% used 4 for overdenture retention. There were great variations regarding retention systems used for mandibular IODs; the most common was individual Locator attachments. Cost was considered the most common reason to choose mandibular IOD, There was a wide variation of materials used for mandibular IFDPs. The most common combination included milled titanium frameworks and acrylic resin teeth. CONCLUSIONS: This survey, completed by 116 prosthodontists from 33 countries, showed that implant treatment for edentulous mandibles is common, but there was great variation among the respondents regarding amount of treatments performed, design, and materials used for the implant prostheses.

Prevalence of Dental Implants and Evaluation of Peri-implant Bone Levels in Patients Presenting to a Dental School: A Radiographic Cross-Sectional 2-Year Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the number of patients with dental implants who present to a dental school clinic for screening and to report the prevalence of peri-implant bone level change detected on digital panoramic radiographs of those subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient screening files for 9,422 patients over a 2-year period were examined to see how many patients presented with dental implants. Those patients with at least one implant were further evaluated by measuring the bone level on the mesial and distal sides of the implant using the screening radiograph. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients (2%) had at least one implant. In regard to implants, 423 were examined and 146 (33%) had no detectable bone loss defined as bone level below the top of the implant. When thresholds of bone loss were evaluated, 109 implants (25%) had ≥ 2 mm of bone loss on either the mesial or distal sides or both. The median bone loss was 1.74 mm for the 277 implants with detectable bone loss and 2.97 mm for the 109 implants that had ≥ 2 mm bone loss. Interestingly, patients who were ≥ 70 years of age had significantly (P = .03) more bone loss in the mandible compared with the maxilla, while patients who were 60 to 69 years of age had significantly greater loss in the maxilla. CONCLUSION: These data reveal that for patients presenting to the dental school for a screening over a 2-year period, 1.98% had one or more dental implants. Furthermore, those patients with implants had a minimum amount of bone loss as measured from the top of the implant.

Survival of 2039 complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses: A retrospective study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Presently, data for the survival of 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses are limited. PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses fabricated by a single dental laboratory supporting several clinicians. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Outcome data were collected over a 5-year period from a large commercial dental laboratory that fabricated 2039 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported monolithic zirconia prostheses. All prostheses were fabricated using the same zirconia system from 1 manufacturer, using standardized protocols. The zirconia prostheses were predominantly monolithic, with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region. Because a 5-year warranty against fracture was offered by this dental laboratory, prostheses that were returned to the laboratory for remake because of catastrophic failure (fracture) or technical complications were identified, and data were analyzed using a life table. RESULTS: Of the 2039 zirconia prostheses evaluated, at least 319 prostheses had a minimum of 3 years of clinical service, and 69 prostheses had a minimum of 4 years of clinical service. A total of 6 fractures were reported, resulting in a first-year interval survival rate of 99.8% and a 5-year cumulative survival rate of 99.3%. Six zirconia prostheses were returned to the laboratory during the 5-year period because of technical complications related to the debonding of titanium cylinders, and 3 prostheses were returned because of fracture of the titanium cylinders. No prostheses were returned because of chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain. CONCLUSIONS: Practice-based evidence from this large sample, short-term retrospective study showed that 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region showed a cumulative survival rate of 99.3% in a 5-year period. The technical complication rate related to this type of prosthesis was minimal.

Implant dentistry in Australia: the present and future. A survey of Australian dentists and specialists.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, implant dentistry has become a routine part of many general dental practices in Australia. However, there has been little information regarding its extent and scope. This investigation aimed to address this issue by surveying Australian general dental practitioners (GDP) and relevant specialists regarding their practice of implant dentistry. METHODS: Anonymous electronic surveys were designed online using SurveyMonkey™ and delivered to the following professional bodies: all seven state/territory branches of the Australian Dental Association, the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Periodontists, the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, and prosthodontist members of the Australian Prosthodontic Society. The surveys were completed online via SurveyMonkey in 2014. RESULTS: The response rates were 7.61% (N = 801) for GDP, 41.76% (N = 38) for prosthodontists, 34.16% (N = 55) for periodontists and 34.07% (N = 46) for oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgeons. Among the respondents, 66.37% (N = 521) of GDP, 86.11% (N = 31) of prosthodontists, 82.98% (N = 39) of periodontists and 97.67% (N = 42) of OMF surgeons indicated that they currently practise implant dentistry. A strong perceived need for further education in this field was also expressed by the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Implant dentistry presently appears to be practised by a significant proportion of GDP across Australia. This is likely to continue to grow in the future.

Epidemiology of Implant Mortality Disparity Among Intraoral Positions and Prosthesis Types.

PURPOSE: To examine the disparity of single-crown implant failure with a similar loss of the splinted prosthesis in differing anatomical locations while controlling for other demographic and clinical variables that may confound the relationship between prosthesis types and implant loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was designed to include patients treated with dental implants from 2003 to 2014. The variables included age, sex, systemic disease, bone graft, implant placement date, position of dental implant, length of dental implant, diameter of dental implant, loading time, type of prosthesis, type of opposing occlusion, latest check date, and survival or loss of the dental implant. The demographic and clinical variables' influence on the survival of dental implants was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The position and diameter were adjusted for the accurate estimation of the relationship between the prosthesis type and survival of the dental implant with the Cox proportional hazard method. RESULTS: A total of 1,151 dental implants from 403 patients were ascertained. After adjusting for the confounding effect of position and diameter, single-crown prostheses were 38.1 (95% CI: 15.1-118) times more likely to be lost than the connected-type prostheses. For single-crown implants, the waiting time for osseointegration before loading was the highest for the maxillary molar position and the lowest for the mandibular molar position (P < .0001), while the most frequent implant loss occurred in the maxillary anterior area, and the second frequent area was the maxillary molar position; the lowest occurrence of implant loss was for the mandibular molar position. This disparity was statistically significant (P = .0271). CONCLUSION: Despite the high survival rates of endosseous implants as a whole, since the variation of implant loss was observed among the different anatomical positions for single-crown implants, special attention has to be given to the maxillary anterior and maxillary molar positions. A longer healing time assuming compensation for disadvantageous bone quality was not directly effective in increasing implant longevity in the vulnerable positions.

Dental Implants in the Elderly Population: A Long-Term Follow-up.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to evaluate implant survival and success in the elderly population and to assess indicators and risk factors for success or failure of dental implants in older adults (aged 60 years and older). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This historical prospective study was developed from a cohort of patients born prior to 1950 who received dental implants in a single private dental office. Implant survival and marginal bone levels were recorded and analyzed with regard to different patient- and implant-related factors. RESULTS: The study examined 245 patient charts and 1,256 implants from one dental clinic. The mean age at the time of implant placement was 62.18 ± 8.6 years. Smoking was reported by 9.4% of the cohort studied. The overall survival rate of the implants was 92.9%; 7.1% of the implants had failed. Marginal bone loss depicted by exposed threads was evident in 23.3% of the implants. Presenting with generalized periodontal disease and/or severe periodontal disease negatively influenced the survival probability of the implant. Implants placed in areas where bone augmentation was performed prior to or during implant surgery did not have the same longevity compared with those that did not have augmentation prior to implantation. CONCLUSION: The overall findings concluded that implants can be successfully placed in older adults. A variety of factors are involved in the long-term success of the implant, and special consideration should be taken prior to placing implants in older adults to limit the influence of those risk factors.

Ten-year survival and complication rates of lithium-disilicate (Empress 2) tooth-supported crowns, implant-supported crowns, and fixed dental prostheses.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate the clinical long-term outcome of tooth-supported crowns (SCs), implant-supported crowns (ISCs), and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) made of a lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic framework material (IPS Empress 2). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1997 and 1999, a total of 184 restorations (106 SCs, 32 ISCs, 33 FDPs, and 13 diverse restorations) were placed in 73 patients. Kaplan-Meier estimation was applied for survival and chipping-free rates. Inter-group comparison of both rates was realized by a log rank test and a 2×2 contingency table. Also, SCs and FDPs were compared regarding adhesive vs. conventional cementation, and anterior vs. posterior positioning, for impact on survival. RESULTS: Due to 14 dropouts (34 restorations) and reasonable exclusion of 19 other restorations, the final dataset included: i) 87 SCs [37 patients, mean observation time 11.4 (±3.8)years]; ii) 17 ISCs [12 patients, mean observation time 13.3 (±2.3)years; and iii) 27 FDPs [19 patients, mean observation time 8.9 (±5.4)years]. The 10-year survival rate/chipping-free rate for SCs were 86.1%/83.4%, for ISCs 93.8%/94.1%, and for FDPs were 51.9%/90.8%. Both ISCs and SCs had a significantly higher survival than FDPs (ISCs vs. FDPs: both tests p=0.001; SCs vs. FDPs: p=0.001 and p=0.005). Differences in the chipping-free rates did not reach significance. Also, neither the cementation mode nor positioning of the restoration had an impact on survival. CONCLUSIONS: SCs had a slightly lower outcome than can generally be expected from single crowns. In contrast, ICSs had a favorable outcome and the FDPs predominantly failed. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The practitioner's choice of dental materials is based (at best) on long-term experience. The present 10-year results are based on comprehensive data analyses and show the high potential of lithium-disilicate as a reliable material, especially for single-unit restoration.

Complete overdentures retained by mini implants: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the use of mini implants to retain complete overdentures in terms of survival rates of mini implants, marginal bone loss, satisfaction, and quality of life. DATA: This report followed the PRISMA Statement and PICO question. This review has been registered at PROSPERO under the number CRD42016036141. SOURCE: Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search of studies published until September 2016 and listed in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library databases. The focused question was: is the use of mini implants feasible for prosthodontic rehabilitation with complete overdentures? RESULTS: The 24 studies selected for review evaluated 1273 patients whose mean age was 65.93 years; these patients had received 2494 mini implants and 386 standard implants for retaining overdenture prosthesis. The mean follow-up time was 2.48 years (range: 1-7 years). There was a higher survival rate of mini implants (92.32%). More frequent failures for maxillary (31.71%) compared with mandibular arches (4.89%). The majority of studies revealed marginal bone loss values similar to those of standard implants (<1.5mm). All studies verified an increase in satisfaction and quality of life after rehabilitation treatment with mini dental implants. CONCLUSION: The present systematic review indicates that the use of mini implants for retaining overdenture prosthesis is considered an alternative treatment when standard treatment is not possible, since it presents high survival rates, acceptable marginal bone loss, and improvements in variables related to satisfaction and quality of life. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Based on the results of this study, the use of a minimum 4 and 6 mini implants can be considered a satisfactory treatment option for rehabilitation of the mandibular and maxillary arches respectively with a complete overdenture.

The Up-to-14-Year Survival and Complication Burden of 256 TiUnite Implants Supporting One-Piece Cast Abutment/Metal-Ceramic Implant-Supported Single Crowns.

PURPOSE: To assess the estimated cumulative survival (ECS) and explore the technical and biologic complications of 256 TiUnite implants (Nobel Biocare) supporting one-piece cast abutment/metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns (ISCs) in situ for up to 14 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective sequentially recruited cohort of 207 patients received 256 metal-ceramic ISCs on TiUnite implants between 2001 and 2014. All but 24 patients with 27 crowns were clinically evaluated between January 2014 and April 2015 in conjunction with or in addition to their tailored maintenance program. Radiographs were obtained, and any previously recorded treatments associated with the crowns were tabulated. The ECS and standard errors were calculated with the life table actuarial method and Greenwood's formula, respectively. The log rank test was applied to assess differences between anterior and posterior crowns. Complication incidence, severity, and economic burden, measured in time/cost accounting units (TAUs), were tallied and compared descriptively. Independent groups were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test and related groups with the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. RESULTS: The mean clinical service time of the crowns was 5.61 years (44 ≥ 10 years). The 14-year ECS was 95.95% ± 3.20% with no significant difference between anterior and posterior prostheses. Only seven implants lost marginal bone ≥ one thread from the time of crown insertion. There were 30 nonterminal complications (16 biologic, 14 mechanical). The associated economic burden was low (n = 35 TAUs). CONCLUSION: High gold-alloy one-piece cast abutment/metal-ceramic ISCs on TiUnite implants exhibited excellent longevity and few complications over 14 years.

Long-term Outcomes of Immediate Loading of Short Implants: A Controlled Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Short implants (≤ 8.5 mm in length) have presented predictable outcomes. However, there is paucity in the long-term evaluation of immediate loading of short implants. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of the immediate loading of short implants on treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients having short implants inserted before December 2010 that were immediately loaded were selected. A database was then created to include the patient's data as well as implant- and prostheses-related outcomes. Long implants inserted at the same surgery and immediately loaded by the same prosthesis formed the control group. The proximal bone loss and the survival rates of implants and prostheses were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-nine short and 38 long implants were placed in 30 patients. The mean follow-up time was 5.2 ± 0.8 years after loading, and three implants (two short and one long) failed. The differences in marginal bone loss and implant survival between short and long implants were not statistically significant. Three prosthetic complications occurred. Two prostheses failed, and the survival rate was 95.8%. CONCLUSION: The immediate loading of short implants is not a risk factor for treatment success. This could be related to the good bone quality and the achievement of adequate primary stability.

Peri-implant bone loss around platform-switched Morse taper connection implants: a prospective 60-month follow-up study.

The aim of this study was to measure the crestal bone level changes at 60 months of follow-up and to evaluate the influence of biologically relevant, anatomical, and implant-related variables. A prospective study design was used. STROBE guidelines were followed. A total of 576 implants were inserted in 270 patients needing an implant-supported, partial, fixed dental prosthesis or a single crown. Standardized peri-apical radiographs were obtained at 2 months (time of implant-abutment connection and prosthetic loading) and 60 months of follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used and inter- and intra-examiner reliability determined. A mixed model was used to evaluate the predictor variables. The correlation among multiple implants inserted in a single patient was considered. Significance was assessed using the type 3 test. Sensitivity analyses, least-squares means analyses, t-tests, and χ2 tests were also conducted. The statistical analysis was performed at the implant level; P<0.05 indicated statistical significance. At the 60-month follow-up, the mean marginal bone remodelling was -0.59±1.34mm (range -5.70 to 3.65mm). Marginal bone loss was significantly influenced by implant depth, implant location, and the interactions implant depth×jaw, implant location×timing of implant placement, and jaw×implant diameter. At the 60-month follow-up, a low mean marginal bone loss was found, which was significantly higher with subcrestal implants and anterior implants.

Utilização de implante curto associado a micro pilar protético, uma alternativa para não realização de cirurgia de levantamento de seio maxilar ­ relato de caso / The use of short implant associated with micro prosthetic abutment, an alternative for not performing maxillary sinus lifting surgery ­ case report

A reabilitação com implantes tem como desafio as limitações de quantidade e qualidade óssea, sendo necessárias técnicas cirúrgicas de enxerto ósseo, permitindo a instalação dos implantes convencionais. Para pacientes que preferem opções menos complexas e traumáticas, os implantes curtos são uma opção de tratamento menos invasiva e com boa previsibilidade. Porém, para o seu melhor desempenho, princípios biomecânicos devem ser empregados, como utilização de mesa oclusal reduzida, ferulização de implantes, conexão interna do tipo Cone Morse e plataforma Switching. O objetivo desse trabalho foi relatar um caso clínico de uma paciente que descartou a cirurgia de levantamento de seio maxilar, sendo então proposto o tratamento com a utilização de implante curto do tipo Cone Morse, em que foi realizado o planejamento reverso e o uso de princípios biomecânicos.

Rehabilitation with implants is challenged by bone quantity and quality limitations, being necessary surgical techniques for bone grafting that allow conventional implants installation. for patients who prefer less complex and traumatic options, short implants are a less invasive treatment option and has good predictability. however, for best performance, biomechanical principles should be used, such as use of reduced occlusal table, splinting implants, internal connection of the Cone Morse type and Switching platform. The aim of this study was to report a case of a patient who dismissed the maxillary sinus lifting surgery, so the treatment proposed was the use of short implant Cone Morse type, in which reverse planning was done with the use of biomechanics principles.

The Retread: A Definition and Retrospective Analysis of 205 Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses.

PURPOSE: Acrylic resin teeth on fixed implant prostheses are subject to time-dependent wear. The purpose of this retrospective analysis is to evaluate and describe the management of such wear in the context of selected variables--patient gender and age, dental arch location, and opposing dentition. The clinical and dental laboratory process to replace the worn teeth is defined as a retread. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective database review from a single private prosthodontic practice was carried out on all patients who had undergone a retread procedure. The patient pool included 205 arches in 194 patients (70 in men, 135 in women) with a mean age of 57.4 years (range: 19.9 to 80.5 years). The retread procedure is described. RESULTS: The mean time between final prosthesis delivery and retread was 7.8 years (range: 1.1 to 22.9 years). Statistical analysis was significant according to dental arch and opposing dentition. A statistical difference was also noted in patients undergoing multiple retread procedures, with a reduction in time between the subsequent procedures. CONCLUSION: Acrylic resin components of implant-supported hybrid prostheses wear over time and are influenced by a combination of the nature of the opposing dentition and patient habits. The dental laboratory process to retread the implant-supported framework is important for long-term patient care and maintenance of an appropriate vertical dimension of occlusion.

[Technical complications rates and plaque control of fixed dental prostheses in patients treated for periodontal disease].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of technical complications of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Chinese patients with a history of moderate or severe periodontitis and periodontally healthy patients(PHP) and analyze the effects of interproximal papillae patterns on food impaction and efficacy of plaque control. METHODS: A total of 103 partially edentulous patients treated with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses between December 2009 and December 2012 for a minimum 1-year follow-up period were recruited from Department of Periodontology, Peking University, School and Hospital of Stomatology. Based on the initial periodontal examination, the participants were divided into three groups: 30 PHP, 36 moderate periodontally compromised patients(mPCP) and 37 severe periodontally compromised patients(sPCP). Implant survival/loss, technical complications, plaque index, papilla index, food impaction and degree of proximal contact tightness of each patient were assessed around the implants at follow-up. According to the implant papilla index, the implants were divided into two groups: the "filling" group with the mesial and distal aspects with papilla index=3 and the "no filling" group with at least one aspect with papilla index<3. Data on implant survival, technical complications were analyzed. Comparisons of the incidence of technical complications were performed between the patients with different periodontal conditions with chi-square or Fisher's exact test. The influences of the interproximal papillae loss on food impaction and efficacy of plaque control were estimated with chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: The total implant survival rate was 100%(162/162) for all three groups. Technical complications were as following: veneer fractures(1.9%, 3/162), abutment screw loosening(1.9%, 3/162), prosthetic screw loosening(3.1%, 5/162) and decementation(3.1%, 5/162) in all subjects. No implant/screw fracture was noted. The incidence of technical complications in sPCP, mPCP and PHP did not yield statistically significant differences(P>0.05). The proportion of the implant with the mesial and distal papilla index=3 in the sPCP was less than that in the PHP and mPCP. The interproximal papillae loss did not appear to affect the food impaction and the plaque index in all three groups(P>0.05). However, for the PHP, the accumulation of plaque at buccal aspect was more in the "no filling" group compared with the "filling" group (implant plaque index[M(Q)]: 1[1] vs 0[0]), and for the sPCP, the accumulation of plaque at lingual aspect was more in the "filling" group compared with the "no filling" group(implant plaque index[M(Q)]: 1[1] vs 0[1], (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The patients with a history of severe periodontitis did not exhibit more technical problems compared with the periodontally healthy patients. The interproximal papillae loss did not show a negative impact on the plaque control and food impaction. However, for the sPCP, changing the morphology and the position of the interproximal contact point to reduce the interdental black triangle may lead to accumulation of plaque at lingual aspect. More attention should be placed on the morphology design of prosthesis, but not the papillae filling up the interproximal space.

Effectiveness of Implant Therapy Analyzed in a Swedish Population: Prevalence of Peri-implantitis.

Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease affecting soft and hard tissues surrounding dental implants. As the global number of individuals that undergo restorative therapy through dental implants increases, peri-implantitis is considered as a major and growing problem in dentistry. A randomly selected sample of 588 patients who all had received implant-supported therapy 9 y earlier was clinically and radiographically examined. Prevalence of peri-implantitis was assessed and risk indicators were identified by multilevel regression analysis. Forty-five percent of all patients presented with peri-implantitis (bleeding on probing/suppuration and bone loss >0.5 mm). Moderate/severe peri-implantitis (bleeding on probing/suppuration and bone loss >2 mm) was diagnosed in 14.5%. Patients with periodontitis and with ≥4 implants, as well as implants of certain brands and prosthetic therapy delivered by general practitioners, exhibited higher odds ratios for moderate/severe peri-implantitis. Similarly, higher odds ratios were identified for implants installed in the mandible and with crown restoration margins positioned ≤1.5 mm from the crestal bone at baseline. It is suggested that peri-implantitis is a common condition and that several patient- and implant-related factors influence the risk for moderate/severe peri-implantitis (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01825772).

A long-term retrospective analysis of survival rates of implants in the mandible.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively analyze the survival rate of endosseous dental implants placed in the edentulous or partially edentulous mandible over a long-term follow-up period of 10 years or more. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The charts of patients who underwent mandibular implant placement at a private prosthodontics practice and received follow-up care for 10 years or more were included in this study. Implants were examined according to the following study variables: patient sex, patient age, degree of edentulism (fully vs partially edentulous), implant location, time of loading (delayed vs immediate), implant size and type, bone quality, prosthesis type, and the presence of other implants during placement. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 2,394 implants placed in 470 patients with 10 to 27 years of follow-up. Of these 2,394 implants, 176 failed, resulting in an overall cumulative survival rate (CSR) of 92.6%. A total of 1,482 implants were placed in edentulous mandibles, and 912 implants were placed in partially edentulous mandibles, with CSRs of 92.6% and 92.7%, respectively. Comparisons of the study variables with respect to CSR were largely nonsignificant. However, there were significant differences in CSRs between anterior vs posterior locations and rough- vs smooth-surfaced implants in addition to some prosthesis types, ages, and bone qualities. The overall CSR of 92.6% in the present study is high and comparable to survival rates observed in previous long-term analyses of mandibular implants. The significant differences observed between implant locations, patient age groups, bone qualities, and prostheses were not suggestive of any remarkable trends. CONCLUSION: Patient sex, age, degree of edentulism, implant location, time of loading, implant size and type, bone quality, prosthesis type, and the presence of multiple implants did not result in any significant effect on long-term implant survival. The CSR observed after 10 to 27 years of follow-up in a single private prosthodontic center was high (92.6%) and supports the use of endosseous dental implants as a long-term treatment option for the rehabilitation of the edentulous and partially edentulous mandible.

An Up-to-15-Year Comparison of the Survival and Complication Burden of Three-Unit Tooth-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Implant-Supported Single Crowns.

PURPOSE: To assess and compare the outcomes and economic complication burden of three-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (TFDPs) and implant-supported single crowns (ISCs) provided to a sequential cohort in a specialist prosthodontic practice over a 15-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sequential patients requiring replacement of a single missing tooth between 1996 and 2010 with a metal-ceramic three-unit TFDP (n = 145 patients, n = 174 prostheses) or ISC (n = 174 patients, n = 220 prostheses) were included. Prostheses subjectively judged at insertion to have an unfavorable 10-year prognosis (17 TFDPs, 0 ISCs) were removed from statistical analyses. The estimated cumulative survival (ECS) was calculated with the life table actuarial method and standard errors calculated with the Greenwood formula. Differences in outcomes between all prostheses and those replacing only anterior or only posterior teeth were assessed with the log rank test. Complication incidence, severity, and economic burden, measured in time/cost accounting units (TAUs), were tallied and compared descriptively. RESULTS: The 15-year ECS did not differ for 112 TFDPs (92.75% ± 3.28%) and 81 ISCs (95.95% ± 2.92%) replacing posterior teeth. However, the 15-year ECS was significantly greater for 139 ISCs (93.33% ± 6.44%) than for 45 TFDPs (82.82% ± 6.50%) replacing anterior teeth. The economic burden of nonterminal complications for both prostheses was low (mean = 0.3 and 0.2 TAUs per prosthesis for TFDPs and ISCs, respectively). This equated to 3 TAUs/100 years in clinical service and 4 TAUs/100 years in clinical service for the TFDPs and ISCs, respectively. CONCLUSION: The survival of three-unit TFDPs and ISCs over 15 years was not statistically different when replacing posterior teeth, but ISCs survived significantly better when replacing anterior teeth. The complication rates of the TFDPs and ISCs were similar, but the economic burden for the TFDPs was greater.

Three-Year Analysis of Fixed and Removable Telescopic Attachment-Retained Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses: Survival and Need for Maintenance.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of fixed implant-supported dental prostheses (FISDPs) and removable ISDPs (RISDPs) retained by telescopic attachments, the factors influencing survival, and the type and number of maintenance treatments required during the observation period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective clinical study is based on patients who were provided with ISDPs between 2004 and 2010. Patient sex, type of prosthesis, location, opposing dentition, and the effect of continuous follow-up on the probability of a favorable outcome, as well as the number of maintenance treatments, were analyzed. A statistical analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A sample of 233 patients with 157 FISDPs and 76 RISDPs supported by a total of 567 implants was randomized and included in the analysis. The mean observation period was 15.9 ± 15.4 months (maximum, 66.0 months). During the observation period, 3.9% of prostheses (7/157 FISDPs and 2/76 RISDPs) ceased to function and 2.3% of implants (13 implants) were lost. The mean survival time was 59.7 ± 2.3 months, with a survival probability of 90.2% after 3 years. Prostheses in the mandible showed significantly higher survival rates than those in the maxilla. Maintenance treatments had to be performed at an earlier stage for patients with RISDPs than for patients with FISDPs. In patients with a conventional removable prosthesis in the opposing arch, the time until maintenance was needed was significantly shorter. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of a retrospective study, it can be concluded that the FISDPs and RISDPs show equally good survival rates after 3 years in function. RISDPs showed a greater and earlier need for maintenance treatments during the first years in function.

Oral aesthetic-related quality of life of muco-supported prosthesis and implant-retained overdenture wearers assessed by a new, short, specific scale (QoLDAS-9).

OBJECTIVES: To validate a new questionnaire for evaluating the 'Oral aesthetic-related quality of life (OARQoL)' of prosthetically restored patients. 'OARQoL' assesses the impact of the self-perceived dental aesthetics on patients' well-being. METHODS: The 'Quality of Life associated with Dental Aesthetic Satisfaction (QoLDAS)' index was designed. After a pilot trial, 70 patients were distributed into two groups depending on their type of prosthetic rehabilitation: Group 1 (CD; n=34): muco-supported complete dentures, and Group 2 (IO; n=36): implant-retained overdentures. Patients answered the QoLDAS and the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-20sp) questionnaires, and reported their satisfaction on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Socio-demographic and prosthesis-related factors were registered. Psychometric properties of the QoLDAS were investigated. Correlations between both indices were explored using the Spearman's rank test. Descriptive and non-parametric probes were run to evaluate the effect of the study variables on the OARQoL (α=0.05). RESULTS: The QoLDAS-9 was reliable and valid. The factor analysis confirmed the existence of three dimensions and meaningful inter-correlations among the nine finally included items. Both scales were inversely correlated. The self-reported aesthetic and functional satisfaction and the education level significantly modulated the OARQoL as measured with the QoLDAS-9. CONCLUSIONS: The QoLDAS-9 confirmed its psychometric capacity for assessing the OARQoL of CD and IO wearers. Both groups showed comparably high OARQoL. Superior education degrees lead to lower OARQoL. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The QoLDAS-9 may be recommended for anticipating the effect of prosthetic restorations on OARQoL. CD and IO are predictable treatment options for improving the aesthetic self-perception of edentulous patients.