Congenital neuroblastoma presenting as profound neonatal metabolic acidosis with systemic hypertension: Case report.

BACKGROUND: Clinical collapse in the newborn most often occurs secondary to sepsis, delivery complications, congenital cardiac defects, or inborn errors of metabolism. We report on a neonate with respiratory, cardiac, and hepatic failure, with disproportionate metabolic acidosis and systemic hypertension, found to be caused by a congenital neuroblastoma. CASE DESCRIPTION: A term infant presented to our Level IV NICU via emergent transport at 12 hours of life with clinical and laboratory findings consistent with respiratory, cardiac, and hepatic failure. Typical workup for sepsis and cardiac etiology was unrevealing. The infant was noted to have systemic hypertension despite prolonged capillary refill. A profound metabolic acidosis led the primary team to pursue a genetics consult. In the course of the workup for disorders of metabolism, a urine organic acids panel revealed an elevated HVA (homovanillic acid) and VMA (vanillylmandelic acid), the metabolites of the neurotransmitters epinephrine, norepinephrine and dopamine. Subsequent abdominal ultrasound and chest/abdomen CT revealed a large heterogeneous mass with internal vascular flow and scattered calcifications arising from the medial limb of the left adrenal gland, consistent with neuroblastoma. CONCLUSION: Although rare, neuroblastomas can present clinically in the perinatal period in a manner requiring immediate life-saving intervention. Providers should consider the diagnosis in the setting of a newborn with a sepsis-like syndrome or profound metabolic acidosis presenting along with systemic hypertension without clear underlying etiology.

A simple method to fabricate stabilized record bases: a modified approach using casting wax for the borders.

Retention and stability of a record base is often compromised in the mouth because of blockout procedures performed before adapting a record base material on a definitive cast. This article presents a technique of fabricating a stable and retentive record base, in which a definitive cast does not receive a blockout procedure so that the record base engages the facial undercuts in the cast by means of a green coloured inlay casting wax.

A new implant designed to maximize contact with trabecular bone: survival to 18 months.

PROBLEM: A roughened, commercially pure titanium (CP-Ti) implant design has been developed that features a different length and pitch for each screw thread to direct functional stresses away from cortical bone and to the more resilient trabecular bone. Abutment-implant connection is made using a conical taper to provide a seal against invasion by microorganisms. PURPOSE: To assess short-term (18 months) clinical performance of this innovative implant design. METHODS: A total of 1,419 implants were placed in 313 patients to support 419 prostheses in a multidisciplinary, multicentered, prospective clinical study conducted by the Ankylos Implant Clinical Research Group (AICRG). More than 100 dentists at 32 centers in the United States, 1 in Korea, and 1 in Taiwan are involved in the study. Failure was defined as implant removal for any reason. The influence of mobility at placement, implant length and diameter, incision type, augmentation, crestal bone reduction, bone density, and the use of the operating room or dental clinic on survival were evaluated over 18 months. Crestal bone loss between placement and uncovering was also determined. RESULTS: Crestal bone loss ranged from 0.2 to 0.5 mm. The overall success rate from placement to 18 months was 96.6%. Implants mobile at placement failed more frequently (16.9%) compared with stable implants (3.1%). Wide-diameter implants and longer implants exhibited higher survival rates. Incision design and surgery location did not influence survival. Bone density was important to clinical survival.

A 48-month multicentric clinical investigation: implant design and survival.

This report is based on a total of 2,955 implants of 6 different designs, randomized and placed in 829 patients and followed for 48 months. Implant failure was defined as nonintegration at uncovering or removal due to mobility, persistent pain, infection, and evidence of radiographic bone loss. Failures were reported for 3 phases of treatment: implant placement to uncovering (phase 1), uncovering to loading (phase 2), and postloading (phase 3). Differences in survival were compared with Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The maxillary single tooth application resulted in 95.2% survival for the hydroxyapatite-coated grooved implants. In the maxillary completely edentulous application, survival of hydroxyapatite grooved and screw implants were considerably better compared with the titanium screw implants. The hydroxyapatite-coated cylinder had better survival than the titanium basket and screw designs in the mandibular completely edentulous application. The hydroxyapatite-coated cylinder and grooved implants in the maxillary posterior partially edentulous application had similar survival rates. The survival of the hydroxyapatite-coated cylinder exceeded that of the titanium basket in mandibular posterior partially edentulous applications. Analyses by phase of treatment indicated a pattern of early failure for nonhydroxyapatite-coated implants compared with hydroxyapatite-coated implants. The implant with the highest survival at all phases of treatment was the hydroxyapatite-coated press-fit cylinder. Two hydroxyapatite-coated implant designs performed well in the challenging posterior maxillary region.

Stability of implants and natural teeth as determined by the Periotest over 60 months of function.

Various methods for evaluating tooth mobility have been developed throughout the years, but their acceptance has been limited because of the subjectivity associated with their use. In recent years, the Periotest has been studied and used to evaluate the mobility of natural teeth and is claimed to b e potentially reliable in assessing the stability of the implant-bone interface. Few clinical implant studies have used natural teeth as controls to monitor changes in mobility associated with dental implants. The Dental Implant Clinical Research Group initiated a long-term clinical study in 1991 to assess the influence of design, application, and site of placement on clinical success and crestal bone height. As part of the study, Periotest values (PTVs) were recorded for 2,623 of the 2,998 implants placed and uncovered. For the statistical analysis, 2,623 implants were tested at second-stage surgery, with the number of implants tested varying at each follow-up visit. Data were collected from investigators at 32 study centers for periods ranging up to 60 months. A total of 975 natural teeth from 409 partially edentulous study subjects served as controls. FPVs on natural teeth and implants were combined, and the overall average Periotest values (OA-PTVs) were compared with values for individual subjects. The effect of implant and natural tooth locations on mobility were evaluated and compared with each other. The combined OA-PTV for all natural teeth was +1.8 and the OA-PTV for all implants was -3.4 PTVs. Compared with those in the maxillae, mandibular teeth and implants were found to be more stable Implants were found to be significantly more stable as compared with natural teeth. The recorded variations in PTVs for natural teeth and implants over the entire evaluation period were not found to be significantly different. This study developed the following conclusions: (1) implants were found to be significantly less mobile as compared with natural teeth for individual subjects; (2) the PTVs for natural teeth and implants did not exhibit significant variation over the evaluation period; (3) the Periotest can provide reproducible assessment of stability in a long-term clinical study; and (4) changes in PTVs may be helpful in evaluating improvement or degradation of the implant-bone complex.

The efficacy of a counter-rotational powered toothbrush in the maintenance of endosseous dental implants.

BACKGROUND: Although most patients with implants have lost their natural teeth because of poor oral hygiene, limited data exist to guide practitioners in their recommendations of home-care regimens for their patients' endosseous dental implants and maintenance of peri-implant soft-tissue health. The authors conducted a study to compare the home-care effectiveness of a counter-rotational powered tooth-brush with that of conventional home-care regimens. METHODS: Before starting the six-year study, the authors trained 85 clinical investigators at 32 dental research centers across the United States in gathering periodontal data. Data for 2,966 implants were entered into a centralized database. Outcomes were derived from 24-month observations of a subset of the implants studied. RESULTS: Repeated-measures analysis of the toothbrushing methods used on 2,966 implants showed that the counter-rotational powered toothbrush removed plaque significantly better than manual methods (P < .0001 Wald statistic) from all implant surfaces and at all recall intervals up to 24 months. Similar results were demonstrated for the gingival index. CONCLUSIONS: The counter-rotational powered brush appears to be well-suited for home-care regimens aimed at maintaining optimal peri-implant soft-tissue health in patients with dental implants. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The importance of maintaining the health of the peri-implant tissues is well-recognized by the dental profession. The counter-rotational powered toothbrush is an effective tool in meeting the oral hygiene challenges associated with implant prosthesis maintenance.

The ankylos endosseous dental implant: assessment of stability up to 18 months with the Periotest.

Osseointegration is an ongoing histometric process that may vary during clinical function. The implant must be stable at uncovering, which reflects the status of bone-implant interface. The physiology of bone healing associated with endosseous implants suggests that this process occurs between 8 and 12 months, and Periotest values (PTVs) tend to reflect changes in the stability of the bone-implant interface. Stability generally increases gradually from the time of uncovering to an optimal PTV that occurs at a point close to 12 months. This stable interface must remain intact for long-term clinical survival. Rapid development of this optimal PTV is highly desirable in order to prevent premature overloading of the bone-implant interface. The Ankylos implant is a new screw-type implant design in which the thread pitch and length vary to maximize trabecular bone contact. The purpose of this report is to evaluate to 18 months the stability (PTVs) of this implant design. More than 457 implants were placed and followed for a period of 18 months by the multicentered, multidisciplinary Ankylos Implant Clinical Research Group (AICRG). Implant stability (PTVs) was assessed using the Periotest at abutment connection and at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months after uncovering. The Periotest values for all implants rapidly reached an optimal status between uncovering (-3.1 PTVs) and 3 months (-3.4 PTVs). This rapid increase in stability has not previously been reported for other implant designs. The mandibular arch was more negative (-3.8 PTVs) at uncovering as compared with the PTVs for the maxillary arch (-1.7 PTVs). Negative PTVs were recorded (1) as length and diameter increased, (2) as bone density increased, (3) in certain jaw regions, (4) as the number of implants/case increased, and (5) for implants stabile at placement. The Ankylos screw implant design produced rapid stabilization 3 months after uncovering.

Survival of various implant-supported prosthesis designs following 36 months of clinical function.

BACKGROUND: The use of endosseous dental implants to replace natural teeth lost to trauma, dental caries, or periodontal disease has become a predictable form of prosthetic treatment since gaining popularity in the early 1980s. While numerous clinical studies have focused on the survival of implants, few address the survival of different prosthesis designs. METHODS: Beginning in 1991, 882 prostheses supported by more than 2,900 implants (687 patients) were placed by the Department of Veterans Affairs Dental Implant Clinical Research Group (DICRG). These prostheses were divided into five research strata based on arch location. The recommended design for each stratum was: bar-supported overdenture (maxillary completely edentulous); screw-retained hybrid denture (mandibular completely edentulous); screw-retained fixed partial denture (mandibular and maxillary posterior partially edentulous); and cemented single crown (maxillary anterior single tooth). Alternative overdenture designs were utilized in the edentulous arches when the recommended prosthesis could not be fabricated. Prosthesis success rates for the research strata were calculated for an observation time of up to 36 months following prosthesis placement. RESULTS: Success rates for the maxillary edentulous stratum ranged from 94.6% for the bar-retained overdenture supported by five to six fixtures to 81.8% for the cap-retained overdenture. The mandibular edentulous strata produced success rates of 98.1% for the fixed hybrid prosthesis to 91.7% for the cap-retained prosthesis. Success rates for maxillary and mandibular posterior fixed partial dentures were 94.3% and 92.6%, respectively, while the maxillary anterior single-tooth prosthesis yielded a success rate of 98.1% for the 36-month observation period. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended prosthesis designs investigated in this study proved to be reliable, with encouraging success rates for an observation period of 36 months following placement.

Implant surface coating and bone quality-related survival outcomes through 36 months post-placement of root-form endosseous dental implants.

Survival rates from placement to 36 months were reported for the ongoing Dental Implant Clinical Research Group studies of root-form endosseous dental implants. Failure rates for all implants were similar in bone qualities 1 and 2 (6.2% and 6.7%, respectively) and slightly higher in bone qualities 3 and 4 (8.5% and 8.7%, respectively). Hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implants had an overall failure rate of 3.9% over 36 months in all bone qualities combined, while non-coated implants had a 13.4% failure rate for the same parameters. For each bone quality, there was a significant difference in implant survival for the non-coated implants (P < 0.01). The highest failure rates for non-coated implants were in bone qualities 3 and 4 (19.1% and 25.5%, respectively). No major difference in survival was found for HA-coated implants placed in each bone quality. Possible reasons for the differences in survival are discussed.

The influence of bone thickness on facial marginal bone response: stage 1 placement through stage 2 uncovering.

BACKGROUND: Various causes of facial bone loss around dental implants are reported in the literature; however, reports on the influence of residual facial bone thickness on the facial bone response (loss or gain) have not been published. This study measured changes in vertical dimension of facial bone between implant insertion and uncovering and compared these changes to facial bone thickness for more than 3,000 hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated and non-HA-coated root-form dental implants. METHODS: Subjects were predominantly white males, 18 to 80+ years of age (mean 62.9 years), who were patients at 30 Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers and two university dental clinics. Alveolar ridges ranged from normal to resorbed with intact basal bone. Following preparation of the osteotomy site, direct measurements with calipers were made of the residual facial bone thickness, approximately 0.5 mm below the crest of the bone. The distance from the top of the implants to the crest of the facial bone was also measured using periodontal probes. Implants were uncovered between 3 to 4 months in the mandible and 6 to 8 months in the maxilla after insertion. Facial bone response was the difference between the height of facial bone at Stage 1 (insertion) and Stage 2 (uncovering). RESULTS: The mean facial bone thickness after osteotomies were made was 1.7 +/- 1.13 mm. When a mean facial bone thickness of 1.8 +/- 1.41 mm or larger remained after site preparation, bone apposition was more likely to occur. The mean facial bone response for 2,685 implants was -0.7 +/- 1.70 mm. For implants integrated at uncovering, the mean bone response was -0.7 +/- 1.69 mm, and -2.8 +/- 1.57 mm for implants mobile at uncovering. Bone quality-4 had the least facial bone response, -0.5 +/- 2.11 mm. Bone responses were similar for both HA-coated and non-HA-coated implants. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly greater amounts of facial bone loss were associated with implants that failed to integrate. As the bone thickness approached 1.8 to 2 mm, bone loss decreased significantly and some evidence of bone gain was seen. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference in bone response between HA-coated and non-HA-coated implants.

Influence of research center on overall survival outcomes at each phase of treatment.

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies of dental implants tend to fall into two broad categories. Efficacy studies apply strict exclusion criteria under carefully controlled conditions to produce a narrow range of results. Effectiveness studies more closely model real-world treatment environments, with a more diverse patient sample and broader range of provider skills. In this multi-center study of more than 2,900 dental implants, study centers were grouped by implant survival scores in an attempt to draw attention to the influence of confounding variables associated with the treatment environment. METHODS: Thirty-two study centers were ranked by implant survival scores at uncovering and assigned to three performance groups. Centers whose overall scores were within approximately one standard deviation of the mean were placed in the middle (70%) performance group (MPG). The remaining centers were placed in either the top (15%) performance group (TPG) or the lower (15%) performance group (LPG). Overall survival and survival by phase of treatment were recorded for each of six implant designs in each of the three performance groups. RESULTS: From implant placement to 36 months, the TPG achieved survival rates from 100% (for 3 designs) to 95.5% (for one design), with an average of 97% for all designs. Increased variations in survival (97.2% to 73%) occurred in the MPG, with larger variations (96.4% to 48%) in the LPG. The HA-coated cylinder recorded consistently high survival scores (over 95%) in all performance groups and all phases of treatment. Failures for other designs in the MPG and LPG were concentrated in the healing period (placement to uncovering), except for the commercially pure titanium screw, which had the most failures between uncovering and prosthesis loading. CONCLUSIONS: Implant design and treatment environment both play an important role in implant survival. Two design characteristics appear to enhance survival: 1) a surgical protocol involving minimal instrumentation at placement, and 2) hydroxyapatite (HA) coating. The HA-coated press-fit cylinder design was the least affected by the center's performance.

Survival and stability (PTVs) of six implant designs from placement to 36 months.

BACKGROUND: Numerous new implant designs and materials have become available over the last decade, each with special claims of superiority in restoring complex cases. Differences in existing clinical databases, study designs, and methods of determining failures/survival are seldom standardized, which complicates comparisons of clinical performance of these new designs. Little information is available concerning the changes in stability of various designs and materials following clinical loading. METHODS: A total of 30 VA medical centers and 2 dental schools combined to form the Dental Implant Clinical Research Group (DICRG). More than 2,900 implants were placed, restored and data gathered from the time of placement to 36 months. Implant stability from uncovering to 36 months and survival from placement to 36 months were determined. Survival was determined using two different approaches--considering all implants removed at any time, regardless of the reason (DICRG approach), and considering only those that were removed following loading of the prosthesis (post-loading approach). Survival was also determined for each of the three phases of implant treatment--phase 1, from the time of placement to uncovering and abutment connection; phase 2, from uncovering to placement and loading of the prosthesis; and phase 3, from loading of the prosthesis to 36 months. RESULTS: The two approaches to determining survival for each implant design and/or material included in the study showed differences in reported numbers ranging from 1.1% to 21.7%. The largest difference in survival was for the commercially pure titanium screw (used in this study only in the maxillary completely edentulous applications), which showed a 21.7% greater survival rate. With the DICRG approach, the hydroxyapatite (HA)-cylinder had the highest survival (97.5%). When considering the post-loading approach, the titanium-alloy screw had the highest survival (99.4%), with the HA-cylinder having the next highest survival (98.6%). The HA-cylinder did not show increased stability from uncovering to 36 months, and the HA-grooved implant became less stable. CONCLUSIONS: HA-coated implants demonstrated the highest survival rate; 2) the post-loading analysis approach inflated survival; 3) non-HA implants showed increased stability following loading; 4) HA-coated implants showed a slight decrease or no change in stability; and 5) the clinical significance of the changes in implant stability must be determined for the long-term.

Long-term assessment (5 to 71 months) of endosseous dental implants placed in the augmented maxillary sinus.

BACKGROUND: It is not uncommon for the placement of endosseous dental implants in the maxillary posterior jaw region to be complicated by the pneumatization of the maxillary sinus. When this occurs, the residual bone between the floor of the sinus and the crestal ridge is inadequate for the placement of implants. The sinus lift procedure provides a way to increase the amount of available bone and the placement of longer implants. METHODS: One hundred twenty (120) implants were placed in 45 augmented maxillary sinuses. Patients ranged in age from 34 to 78 years. The implant design included a limited number of non-hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated titanium screws, with the majority of the implants being HA-coated cylinders, grooved cylinders, and screws. The augmentation materials were autogenous bone, allogenic bone (demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft, DFDBA), alloplastic bone (HA), combination grafts of HA and DFDBA, and combination grafts of autogenous bone and DFDBA. All the cases were successfully restored with implant-supported, bar-retained overdentures or fixed partial dentures. The follow-up began at Stage 2 uncovering and ranged from 5 to 71 months, with a mean of 38.2 and standard deviation of 14.6 months. RESULTS: Three (2.5%) of the 120 implants failed between the period of implant placement and 36 months. Failures appeared to be associated with a history of smoking. Other complications encountered during the study are presented. Implant survival was higher in those placed in grafted sinuses (97.5%) than in those placed in the posterior maxilla without sinus grafting (90.3%). CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of implants placed in augmented sinuses to support dental prostheses.

The influence of preoperative antibiotics on success of endosseous implants at 36 months.

The benefits of prophylactic antibiotics are well recognized in dentistry. However, their routine use in the placement of endosseous dental implants remains controversial. As part of the comprehensive Dental Implant Clinical Research Group (DICRG) clinical implant study, the preoperative or postoperative use of antibiotics, the type used, and the duration of coverage were left to the discretion of the surgeon. These data for 2,973 implants were recorded and correlated with failure of osseointegration during healing (Stage 1), at surgical uncovering (Stage 2), before loading the prosthesis (Stage 3), and from prosthesis loading to 36 months (Stage 4). The results showed a significantly higher survival rate at each stage of treatment in patients who had received preoperative antibiotics.

Implant survival in patients with type 2 diabetes: placement to 36 months.

BACKGROUND: Because the life expectancy of individuals continues to increase, dentists providing dental implant treatment can expect to see an increasing number of patients with diabetes mellitus. Today, there are little data available concerning the clinical outcomes involving the use of implant treatment for patients with diabetes mellitus. There are three types of diabetes mellitus: Type 1 (insulin dependent), Type 2 (non-insulin dependent), and gestational. Because of possible complications from patients with diabetes mellitus, they are excluded from participation in most clinical studies of endosseous dental implant survival. METHODS: This study attempted to determine if Type 2 diabetes represents a significant risk factor to the long-term clinical performance of dental implants, using the comprehensive DICRG database. Diabetes was a possible exclusion criterion; however, the final decision on Type 2 patients was left to the dental implant team at the research center. A total of 2,887 implants (663 patients) were surgically placed, restored, and followed for a period of 36 months. Of these, 2,632 (91%) implants were placed in non-diabetic patients and 255 (8.8%) in Type 2 patients. Failures (survival) were compared using descriptive data. Possible clustering was also studied. RESULTS: A model assuming independence showed that implants in Type 2 patients have significantly more failures (P = 0.020). However, if correlations among implants within the patient are considered, the significance level becomes marginal (P = 0.046). The experience of the surgeon did not produce a clinically significant improvement in implant survival. The use of chlorhexidine rinses following implant placement resulted in a slight improvement (2.5%) in survival in non-Type 2 patients and a greater improvement in Type 2 patients (9.1%); the use of preoperative antibiotics improved survival by 4.5% in non-Type 2 patients and 10.5% in Type 2 patients. The use of HA-coated implants improved survival by 13.2% in Type 2 diabetics. CONCLUSION: Type 2 diabetic patients tend to have more failures than non-diabetic patients; however, the influence was marginally significant. These findings need to be confirmed by other scientific clinical studies with a larger Type 2 diabetic sample size.

Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter.

BACKGROUND: It is generally accepted that diameter and length of an endosseous dental implant and its stability at placement are critical factors in achieving and maintaining osseointegration. In the event of slight implant mobility at placement, the conventional or accepted treatment is to place a longer implant and/or one of wider diameter. This manuscript presents stability and survival/failure data for implants of different diameters and lengths following 36 months post-placement, as well as crestal bone loss data between placement and uncovering. METHODS: A subset of the Dental Implant Clinical Research Group's database was used to study the 3-year survival and stability of various implant lengths (7 mm, 8 mm, 10 mm, 13 mm, and 16 mm) and diameters (3 mm+ and 4 mm+). Placement to uncovering crestal bone loss was also determined. The implants were generally representative of those available for clinical use (screws, basket, grooved, hydroxy-apatite-coated, CP-Ti, Ti-alloy). The study protocol specified that the implants be randomized to various jaw regions to accomplish the primary goals of the study--the comparison of each implant design's overall survival. A total of 2,917 implants were placed, restored, and followed. Data for all 3 mm to 3.9 mm diameter implants were pooled into a "3+" group, and the 4 mm to 4.9 mm diameter implants into a "4+" mm group. No attempt was made to look at the influence of any other variables on survival outcomes. The possible influence of clustering on survival was taken into consideration. RESULTS: The 3+ mm group had a mean stability (PTV) of -3.8 (SD = 2.9), and the 4+ group had a mean PTV of -4.4 (SD = 2.7) (P < 0.05). The PTVs for implant lengths ranged from -2.9 (SD = 2.8) for 7 mm lengths to -3.9 (SD = 2.9) for 16 mm lengths (P < 0.05). Survival to 36 months was 90.7% for the 3+ diameter and 94.6% for the 4+ group (P = 0.01). Survival ranged from 66.7% for the 7 mm implants to 96.4% for 16 mm implants (P = 0.001). Outcomes did not change when clustering was considered, although the P value decreased slightly. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that: 1) shorter implants had statistically lower survival rates as compared with longer implants; 2) 3+ mm diameter implants had a lower survival rate as compared with 4+ mm implants; 3) 3+ mm diameter implants are less stable (more positive PTVs) than 4+ mm implants; and 4) there was no significant difference in crestal bone loss for the two different implant diameters between placement and uncovering.

Stability of the bone-implant complex. Results of longitudinal testing to 60 months with the Periotest device on endosseous dental implants.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of the health and integrity of the bone-implant complex (osseointegration) has been shown to be essential for long term success of root-form, endosseous dental implants. If reliable clinical indicators of adequacy of the bone-implant complex existed, they could stimulate new and innovative early intervention research to arrest of reverse early deterioration of the bone-implant complex. In the absence of such indicators, this has been problematic. The Periotest may have the potential to provide this information by indirectly assessing the status of the bone-implant complex. However, little information is available that documents either the capability of the Periotest to reliably assess changes of the bone-implant complex or the "normal variations" in Periotest values (PTVs) for both HA-coated and non-coated implants. METHODS: The purpose of this paper was to document changes in PTVs as influenced by various implant surfaces, implant designs, and bone densities. The mean PTVs recorded for each visit, for all implant types and bone densities, were combined to provide an overall average PTV (A-PTV). The changes in stability (PTVs) were analyzed using a generalized linear model (GLM) with repeated measures (Hotelling's Trace). RESULTS: The A-PTV for all implants over all visits was -3.5. The mean PTVs ranged from -4.2 (SD = 2.4) at uncovering to -3.9 (SD = 2.9) at 60 months. All implants in bone qualities 1 and 2 (BQ-1 and BQ-2) became more stable over time, while those in bone quality 3 or 4 (BQ-3 and BQ-4) showed a slight decrease in stability. In BQ-1, the mean PTVs increased from -4.7 at uncovering to -4.9 at 60 months. A similar increase in stability occurred in BQ-2 (-4.1 at uncovering to -4.4 at 60 months). In BQ-3, the stability of the implants decreased over time (-3.6 at uncovering to -2.9 at 60 months), with similar changes recorded for BQ-4 (-2.5 at uncovering to -1.0 at 60 months). When comparing the stability of all HA-coated with all non-coated implants, the HA implants became less stable (-4.4 to -3.4) over time, while non-coated implants showed an improvement in stability (-3.5 to -4.5). The changes in stability found in BQ-1, BQ-2, and BQ-3 were similar, with HA implants becoming less stable and non-coated more stable. HA- and non-coated comparisons were not possible in BQ-4 since there were too few non-coated implants placed in this type of bone. The HA-coated screw showed a decrease in stability when compared to the non-coated screw. CONCLUSIONS: Conclusions of the study are as follows: 1) PTVs are influenced by bone quality and surface coating of the implant; 2) the PTVs at the time of uncovering provide the best estimate of a clinically acceptable PTV for that bone-implant complex; 3) while the PTVs for any bone-implant complex may fluctuate +/- 1.0 around the uncovering PTV during routine healing and loading of the implant, a consistent shift toward a positive PTV that approaches "0" should be cause for concern that the bone-implant complex may be at risk of failure; 4) HA-coated implants became slightly less stable (more positive PTVs) over time, while the non-coated implants became more stable (more negative PTVs); and 5) until a "critical PTV" can be accurately identified, it is suggested that a consistent shift in recorded PTVs that exceeds the +3.0 value on the PTV scale should be viewed with concern for possible deterioration at the bone-implant complex.

Three-year post-placement survival of implants mobile at placement.

BACKGROUND: Although rigid fixation of endosseous implants at the time of placement is generally thought to be a prerequisite for successful osseointegration, the Dental implant Clinical Research Group (DICRG) of the Department of Veterans Affairs has reported on implants that integrated despite being mobile at placement. The present study examines the frequency of osseointegration and the 36-month post-placement survival of implants mobile at placement in a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal clinical study of more than 3,000 implants conducted by the DICRG. METHODS: A total of 3,111 implants of 6 different designs were placed in all jaw regions in more than 800 patients at 32 study centers. At the time of this report, 2,770 of these implants had been followed for 36 months post-placement. They included 89 implants that were mobile at placement. Data for demographic variables, implant coating, bone quality, incision type, bone augmentation, and antibiotic usage were recorded. An electronic hand-held probe was used to measure mobility at uncovering and at regular follow-up intervals. RESULTS: Eighty-nine of 2,770 inserted implants were mobile at placement. Results are reported for two periods: from placement to 36 months and from prosthetic loading to 36 months. The latter method eliminated early failures and resulted in substantially higher scores for both mobile implants at placement (95.9% survival from prosthetic loading to 36 months post-placement versus 79.8% from placement to 36 months) and implants not mobile at placement (98.4% versus 93.4%). Mobility at placement was significant to 3-year survival (P < 0.001). Hydroxyapatite (HA) coating improved the performance of implants mobile at placement (91.8% for HA-coated versus 53.6% for non-HA) and those not mobile at placement (97.2% for HA-coated versus 87.4% for non-HA). Radiographic findings suggested that crestal bone response around implants which were mobile versus immobile at placement was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Although implant stability at the time of placement is clearly desirable as seen in the superior 3-year survival of stable implants, it may not be an absolute prerequisite to osseointegration or to long-term survival. Several factors may influence the decision to remove or replace a mobile implant. HA-coating significantly improved the performance of both mobile and immobile implants at placement to 3 years post-placement (P < 0.001).

Periodontal-type measurements associated with hydroxyapatite-coated and non-HA-coated implants: uncovering to 36 months.

BACKGROUND: While the use of hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated endosseous dental implants has gained in popularity over the past 10 years, the short-term and long-term predictability and indications for their use remain highly controversial. Some reports suggest that the HA coating may separate from the substructure, undergo dissolution in tissue fluids, and/or contribute to rapid osseous breakdown around the implant. Other reports, however, relate favorable responses to HA-coated implants, which include rapid bone adaptation to the HA, greater stability at uncovering, and increased coronal bone growth. These contradictions may be related to differences in chemical composition of the HA on the implant surface. Most clinicians and researchers may agree that long-term, independent, scientific clinical studies are needed to compare HA-coated and non-HA-coated (titanium-alloy and CP-titanium) implants under the same conditions. Concerns appear in the literature that HA-coated implants experience greater breakdown because they are more susceptible to bacterial colonization due to their roughness and hydrophilicity. Some studies suggest that specific putative periodontal pathogens may adhere to the HA, thereby predisposing the implant to greater peri-implantitis than that experienced by non-HA implants. METHODS: A total of 32 clinical research centers, located in various geographic regions of the United States, were selected to participate in a comprehensive clinical study. More than 2,900 HA-coated and non-HA implants were randomized as to location within one of three jaw regions--maxillary anterior, mandibular anterior, and mandibular posterior--and followed for 36 months. It can be assumed that in each of these jaw regions, the conditions associated with both implant surface types would be similar enough to permit meaningful comparisons of periodontal-type measurements that have not previously been reported. Periodontal-type measurements (gingiva, plaque, suppuration, and calculus indices; probing depth; attachment levels; recession; and keratinized tissue width) for each aspect of each implant (mesial, facial, distal, and lingual) were recorded at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months following implant uncovering. The implant was considered the experimental unit for analysis using generalized estimating equation and repeated measure methods. Data for the four aspects of each implant, as well as measurements over time, were all clustered in the unit of analysis. RESULTS: The percentages of implants with zeros recorded for the indices was remarkably similar for both HA-coated and non-HA implants. While statistically significant differences were found for some of the measurements associated with HA-coated and non-HA implants under certain conditions, these differences were too small to be considered clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was no clinically significant difference between the periodontal-type measurements for HA-coated and non-HA-coated implants followed for a period from 3 through 36 months. The concerns about HA-coated implants being associated with adverse periodontal responses for the HA chemical composition included in this study appear to be unfounded for a period of clinical performance up to 36 months.