Evaluating the Role of AI in Predicting the Success of Dental Implants Based on Preoperative CBCT Images: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Dental implant surgery has become a widely accepted method for replacing missing teeth. However, the success of dental implant procedures can be influenced by various factors, including the quality of preoperative planning and assessment. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging provides valuable insights into a patient's oral anatomy, but accurately predicting implant success remains a challenge. Materials and Methods: In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), a cohort of 150 patients requiring dental implants was randomly divided into two groups: an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted group and a traditional assessment group. Preoperative CBCT images of all patients were acquired and processed. The AI-assisted group utilized a machine learning model trained on historical data to assess implant success probability based on CBCT images, while the traditional assessment group relied on conventional methods and clinician expertise. Key parameters such as bone density, bone quality, and anatomical features were considered in the AI model. Results: After the completion of the study, the AI-assisted group demonstrated a significantly higher implant success rate, with 92% of implants successfully integrating into the bone compared to 78% in the traditional assessment group. The AI model showed an accuracy of 87% in predicting implant success, whereas traditional assessment methods achieved an accuracy of 71%. Additionally, the AI-assisted group had a lower rate of complications and required fewer postoperative interventions compared to the traditional assessment group. Conclusion: The AI-assisted approach significantly improved implant success rates and reduced complications, underscoring the importance of incorporating AI into the dental implant planning process.

One-Piece Mini Dental Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: 10-Year Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of a Non-Comparative Longitudinal Observational Study.

This study presents the first 10-year follow-up investigation of the implant survival and peri-implant outcomes of one-piece mini dental implants (MDIs) retaining mandibular implant overdentures (IODs), including marginal bone level alterations (ΔMBLs), clinical peri-implant parameters, and complications. Twenty participants with horizontally atrophied mandibles received complete dentures and four MDIs (diameter 1.8 mm) at baseline. The dentures were converted into IODs with O-ring attachments. The 10-year follow-up comprised a radiological assessment of ΔMBLs, peri-implant parameters, as well as biological and technical complications. Results from a 10-year follow-up of 14 participants showed a 100% implant survival rate for all 56 implants. The mean ΔMBL after 10 years was -1.12 ± 0.80 mm, with 49 implants classified as successful (ΔMBL < 2 mm) and 7 implants with satisfactory survival (ΔMBL 2-4 mm). Time after implant placement significantly influenced ΔMBL, with stable MBLs after 5 years. The prosthetic survival rate after 10 years was 93%. ΔMBLs were not influenced by implant position or gender but were significantly smaller in subjects older than 65 years. Conclusively, one-piece MDIs with O-ring attachments offer a reliable treatment option for horizontally atrophied mandibles after 10 years, with high implant and prosthetic survival rates, potentially benefiting from advanced age regarding peri-implant bone stability.

Implant survival rate and marginal bone loss of 174 implants with different variables associated over a minimum observational period of 20 years: A retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants with different variables associated over an observational period of at least 20 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with at least one implant placed prior to 2001 were recalled and visited. Data on implant macro-design, prosthetic aspects, site distribution, and patient-related factors were collected. MBL was evaluated on intraoral X-rays and peri-implant soft tissue parameters were recorded. The patients were asked to fill out a questionnaire to evaluate their satisfaction with the treatment received. Descriptive statistics indicators were estimated. Analysis of variance and analysis of covariance models were used to investigate any differences in the MBL and peri-implant probing depth (PPD) among the variables. A chi-square analysis was performed to investigate any association between different types of prosthetic implant-supported rehabilitations and survival/success outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-one (41) patients and 174 implants were included with a mean observational period of 23.3 ± 2.8 years. The implant survival and success rates were 96.5% and 83.3% respectively, while 3.5% of early failures were detected. The lowest success rates were observed for implants supporting fixed full-arch rehabilitations (71.05%) and overdenture rehabilitations (86.11%). A mean MBL of 1.81 ± 0.71 mm and a mean PPD of 3.38 ± 1.62 mm were recorded. The interaction between the collected data with MBL and PPD did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the variables (p > 0.05). A statistically significant difference was recorded when analyzing the association between the different types of prosthetic implant-supported rehabilitations and success rates (p = 0.014), with fixed and removable full-arch rehabilitations presenting with lower success rates. Answers to the questionnaire showed a generally high level of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this retrospective study and based on the results, an implant survival rate higher than 96% was observed after a mean observational period of 23.3 ± 2.8 years. Both the implant survival rate and MBL seemed stable after a mean observational period of 23.3 ± 2.8 years. Implants supporting fixed and removable full-arch rehabilitations seemed to present lower success rates over time. Implant rehabilitation seemed to provide patients with optimal long-term outcomes in terms of functional and psychological aspects.

Evaluation of the Success of Autogenous Block Grafting in Atrophic Maxillary and Mandibular Ridges Prior to and After Implant Placement.

BACKGROUND: Dental implantology's success relies on adequate bone volume and quality, necessitating bone augmentation for implant placement. Primary lateral bone augmentation, utilizing autogenous block grafts, addresses horizontal bone loss. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of autogenous block grafting, specifically ramus and fibula blocks, in addressing severe atrophic ridges before and after implant placement. METHODS: Twenty-one patients underwent block grafting, predominantly using the ramus technique (80/20 ratio). CBCT measurements assessed horizontal grafting outcomes. Implant success and bone volume changes were analyzed. RESULTS: Post-grafting, bone width increased from 1.8-3.1 mm to 4.5-6 mm, exceeding critical thresholds. Implant success reached 95%, indicating the grafting techniques' effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Autogenous block grafting, especially with ramus and fibula blocks, transforms severe atrophic ridges, enabling successful implant integration. Long-term follow-up is essential for a comprehensive evaluation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides crucial insights into autogenous block grafting's transformative impact on challenging cases, guiding future applications in reconstructive dentistry.

Influence of Implant Location, Number, and Design in Ischemic Zone for Implant Prosthesis Success Rate: A Comparative Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The performance of an implant-supported prosthesis depends on the implant type, number, implant location, and prosthesis design which is directly associated with the distribution of the occlusal forces during mastication. The purpose of the present study is to analyze with three-dimensional (3D) finite element comparative analysis, the influence of implant location, number, and prosthesis design in the mandibular posterior region where multiple posterior teeth replacement is indicated, which in turn is associated with the longevity or Implant success rate. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mandibular posterior section, where 4 teeth are missing, based on the space available for implants and following the surgical guide instructions, a standard make four implants (1st and 2nd premolars {3.8 mm × 11.5 mm}, 1st and 2nd molar {5.1 mm × 11.5 mm}) were selected and with standardization for placement, 4 groups were created with different implant location, number and prosthesis design from the selected implants as model FM1, FM2, FM3, FM4. Finite element analysis was carried out using ANSYS software, version 14.5 (ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA, USA) for assessment of stress, strain, and deformation around implant and bone. RESULTS: Maximum von Mises stress on vertical loading was highest for FM4 (139.55MPa) model (center of prosthesis on premolar and molar pontics) and lowest for FM3 (53.65MPa) model (on 2nd premolar pontic) with values in decreasing order as FM4 ˃ FM2 ˃ FM1 ˃ FM3. Maximum von Mises stress on oblique loading was highest at the distal of 1st molar implant pontic for FM2 (539.81MPa) and lowest at the 2nd premolar pontic for FM3 (352.48MPa) model with values as FM2˃FM1˃FM4˃FM3. Deformation for vertical and oblique loading was observed minimum at the buccal cusp and buccal crestal bone of 2nd premolar, 1st molar on FM3 model against highest deformation on buccal and lingual crestal bone, cuspal area of 2nd premolar, 1st molar implants. For oblique loading minimum deformation was seen for the 2nd premolar, 1st molar cuspal area in FM3, and maximum at the 2nd premolar region in FM1. CONCLUSION: Four single implants may be chosen if there is enough mesiodistal and buccolingual space to allow for a minimum inter-implant and inter-implant-tooth distance that can be maintained while putting the least amount of stress on the implants and bone. To reduce stress on the bone and implants, it is best to avoid long-span implant-supported prostheses when using fixed implant-supported prostheses.

Clinical outcomes of 3-5 years follow-up of immediate implant placement in posterior teeth: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Immediate implant placement in posterior teeth has become popular in recent years. However, only a few studies focused on evaluating the long-term success of immediate implant placement. PURPOSE: To analyze the clinical outcomes of immediate implant placement in the posterior region with conventional loading with 3-5 years follow-up following the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. METHOD: The study was done in 25 bone-level implants (Straumann® SLActive® bone level tapered implant, Straumann®, Basel, Switzerland) in 19 patients who underwent immediate implant placement in a posterior tooth with conventional loading with 3-5 years follow-up. The overall success and survival of these placements were evaluated following the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference using chart records, clinical examination, radiographic evaluation, and outcomes measurement. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by using a numeric rating scale. The biological and technical status, modified Pink Esthetic Score (mPES), complications, and marginal bone change were also evaluated. The analysis was done using SPSS version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The data were analyzed using a paired samples t-test. RESULTS: It was found that 24 out of the 25 (96%) dental implants survived for an average of 57 ± 8.07 months. All of the 24 surviving dental implants were considered an operational success. The average mPES was 9.75 ± 0.44. The major prosthetic complications seen were: (1) proximal contact loss (41.67%), (2) loosening of the screw (8.33%), and (3) cement debonding (4.17%). CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implant placement in a posterior tooth with conventional loading yields a predictable result with some complications. The most prominent complications were proximal contact loss, followed by loosening of the screw and cement debonding. The implant survival rate was 96% at a mean time follow-up of 4 years and 9 months.

Outcomes and influencing factors of dental implants in fibula, iliac crest, and scapula free flaps: a retrospective case-control study.

PURPOSE: Reconstruction with vascularized bone grafts after ablative surgery and subsequent dental rehabilitation with implants is often challenging; however, it helps improve the patient's quality of life. This retrospective case-control study aimed to determine the implant survival/success rates in different vascularized bone grafts and potential risk factors. METHODS: Only patients who received implants in free vascularized bone grafts between 2012 and 2020 were included. The free flap donor sites were the fibula, iliac crest, and scapula. The prosthetic restoration had to be completed, and the observation period had to be over one year after implantation. Implant success was defined according to the Health Scale for Dental Implants criteria. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients with 227 implants were included. The implant survival rate was 86.3% after an average of 48.7 months. The causes of implant loss were peri-implantitis (n = 24), insufficient osseointegration (n = 1), removal due to tumor recurrence (n = 1), and osteoradionecrosis (n = 5). Of all implants, 52.4% were classified as successful, 19.8% as compromised, and 27.8% as failed. Removal of osteosynthesis material prior to or concurrent with implant placement resulted in significantly better implant success than material not removed (p = 0.035). Localization of the graft in the mandibular region was associated with a significantly better implant survival (p = 0.034) and success (p = 0.002), also a higher Karnofsky Performance Status Scale score with better implant survival (p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Implants placed in vascularized grafts showed acceptable survival rates despite the potential risk factors often present in these patient groups. However, peri-implantitis remains a challenge.

Comparison of Prophylactic Effects between Localized Biomimetic Minocycline and Systematic Amoxicillin on Implants Placed Immediately in Infected Sockets.

This study evaluated the prophylactic effect of localized biomimetic minocycline and systemic amoxicillin on immediate implant placement at infected extraction sites. Twelve mongrels with six implants each were randomly assigned to five groups: uninfected negative control (Group N); infected with oral complex bacteria (Group P); infected and treated with amoxicillin one hour before implant placement (Group A); infected and treated with minocycline during implant placement (Group B); and infected and treated with amoxicillin one hour before implant placement and with minocycline during implant placement (Group C). Radiographic bone level, gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), papillary bleeding index (PBI), and removal torque (RT) were recorded. There was no significant difference between Groups A, B, and C for bone loss. Group A showed the highest RT, the lowest PBI, and significantly lower GI and PD values than Group P. Group B exhibited significantly higher RT value than Group N and significantly smaller PD value than Group P at 6 w postoperatively. Localized minocycline could improve implant success by reducing bone loss and increasing RT and systemic amoxicillin could maintain the stability of the peri-implant soft tissue. However, combined use of these two antibiotics did not augment the prophylactic effect.

Evaluation of the clinical safety and performance of a narrow diameter (2.9 mm) bone-level implant: a 1-year prospective single-arm multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Narrow-diameter implants facilitate single-tooth restoration when interdental or inter-implant spaces and bone volume are inadequate for using standard diameter implants. This study reports the short-term data on the clinical safety and performance of a bone-level-tapered two-piece implant with a 2.9 mm diameter in the clinical practice setting. This study was retrospectively registered on March 1st, 2016 (NCT02699866). METHODS: Implants were placed in partially healed extraction sockets of the central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single-tooth replacement. The primary outcome was to assess implant survival at 12 months after placement. Secondary outcomes included implant success, pink esthetic score, marginal bone-level changes, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty four males and 17 females with a mean age of 44.5 (± 18.3 standard deviation) received the implant. Three out of 41 implants were lost yielding a survival rate of 92.7% (95%-CI: 79.0%; 97.6%) at 1 year. One patient reported an ongoing foreign body sensation, pain, and/or dysesthesia at month 12. The average pink esthetic score at 6 months was 11.2 (95%-CI: 10.5; 11.9). The bone level was stable with a mean bone-level change of-0.3 mm (± 0.42 mm standard deviation) at 1 year after implantation. No serious adverse events or adverse device events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a 2.9 mm diameter bone-level-tapered implant is a safe and reliable treatment option for narrow tooth gaps at the indicated locations. Overall performance and good survival rates support their use in cases, where wider implants are unsuitable.

Survival and success of zirconia compared with titanium implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review assessed the available evidence on the survival and success rate of zirconia and titanium implants. As secondary outcomes, aesthetic, radiographic and clinical parameters, as well as biological and mechanical complications, were considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed up to March 2022 to identify CCTs/RCTs comparing zirconia and titanium implants with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed when ≥ 2 articles with similar characteristics were retrieved. RESULTS: Four published articles with two RCTs (2 different patient populations) with 100 zirconia and 99 titanium implants that were followed up over 12-80 months were selected out of the 6040 articles. A non-statistically significant difference between zirconia and titanium implant survival at 12 months was suggested (P = 0.0938). The success rates were 57.5-93.3% and 57.1-100% for zirconia and titanium implants, respectively. The pink aesthetic score (PES) was higher for zirconia (10.33 ± 2.06 to 11.38 ± 0.92) compared to titanium implants (8.14 ± 3.58 to 11.56 ± 1.0). CONCLUSION: Based on the 2 RCTs retrieved in the literature, similar survival rates were reported for zirconia and titanium implants in the short term (12 months of follow-up). Future RCTs are warranted to evaluate the long-term outcomes of zirconia implants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Zirconia implants may be the procedure of choice, particularly in the aesthetic zone, since they show a similar survival and success rate as titanium implants on a short-term follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Systematic review registration number-CRD42021288704 (PROSPERO).

Efficacy of Nasal Floor Augmentation on the Survival Rate of Dental Implants: A Systematic Review.

Aim: To systematically review the existing scientific literature, to summarize and assess the efficacy of the nasal floor augmentation on the survival rate of dental implants by systematically reviewing the available literature. Methodology: Review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42027289143. Electronic databases like PubMed, google scholar and Ebsco Host were searched from 2000 to December 2021 for studies reporting efficacy of nasal floor augmentation and reporting outcomes in terms of survival rates of dental implants. Quality assessment of included comparative follow-up studies was done using the critical checklist put forward by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) was used. Results: Only nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of those nine studies, five were case reports and four comparative follow-up studies. A total of 14 implants were placed in five patients with a survival rate of 100% in included case reports, while a total of 408 implants were placed in 130 patients with survival rates ranging from 89% to 100% in included comparative follow-up studies. No complications were observed during follow-ups, and the patients were satisfied with the functional and aesthetic results of the treatment. Quality assessment of included studies showed moderate to low risk of bias with overall high quality of studies. Conclusion: The results of this systematic review indicate that implant placement by nasal floor augmentation techniques can be considered as a predictable treatment modality. However, due to the scarcity of literature, more studies should be carried out on proving the efficacy of nasal floor augmentation on survival rate or success of dental Implants.

Outcomes and influential factors in functional and dental rehabilitation following microvascular fibula flap reconstruction in the maxillomandibular region: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the factors influencing and success rates of dental implants for functional and dental rehabilitation following microvascular fibula flap reconstruction in the maxillomandibular region. MAIN TEXT: We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane's CENTRAL, as well as gray literature sources and manual searches of notable journals. The search was performed from inception until February 2023. Studies were included if they examined functional and dental rehabilitation outcomes in patients receiving maxillofacial reconstruction using microvascular fibula flaps and were retrospective or prospective cohort studies involving human subjects. Case-control studies, research involving other reconstruction methods, and animal-based studies were excluded. Data was extracted and confirmed by two independent researchers, and risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were conducted for dental implant and graft success rate, with separate analyses for different factors affecting the outcome. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and the I2 test. The pooled success rate for implants was 92% and for grafts, 95%, with significant heterogeneity. Implants in fibular grafts had a 2.91 times higher failure rate than those in natural bones. Radiated bone and smoking were identified as factors influencing implant failure, with radiated bone having a 2.29 times higher risk and smokers having a 3.16 times higher risk compared to their respective counterparts. Patient-reported outcomes showed improvements in key areas such as dietary intake, mastication, speech, and esthetics. The success rates declined over time, emphasizing the importance of long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Dental implants in free fibula grafts generally have favorable success rates, with minimal bone resorption, manageable probing depths, and limited bleeding on probing. Implant success is influenced by factors such as smoking and radiated bone.

Vestibuloplasty and its impact on the long-term survival and success of dental implants in irradiated and non-irradiated patients after head and neck tumor therapy: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of vestibuloplasty on the clinical success and survival of dental implants in head and neck tumor patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted. All patients received surgical therapy of a tumor in the head or neck and underwent surgical therapy and, if necessary, radiotherapy/radiochemotherapy. Patients with compromised soft tissue conditions received vestibuloplasty using a split thickness skin graft and an implant-retained splint. Implant survival and success and the influence of vestibuloplasty, gender, radiotherapy, and localizations were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 247 dental implants in 49 patients (18 women and 31 men; mean age of 63.6 years) were evaluated. During the observation period, 6 implants were lost. The cumulative survival rate was 99.1% after 1 year and 3 years and 93.1% after 5 years for patients without vestibuloplasty, compared to a survival and success rate of 100% after 5 years in patients with vestibuloplasty. Additionally, patients with vestibuloplasty showed significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption rates after 5 years (mesial: p = 0.003; distal: p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a high cumulative survival and success rate of dental implants after 5 years in head and neck tumor patients, irrespective of irradiation. Patients with vestibuloplasty showed a significantly higher rate of implant survival and significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption after 5 years. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Vestibuloplasty should always be considered and applied if required by the anatomical situations to achieve high implant survival/success rates in head and neck tumor patients.

Do Systemic Diseases and Medications Influence Dental Implant Osseointegration and Dental Implant Health? An Umbrella Review.

The aim of this umbrella review is to evaluate what are the most common medications and systemic diseases that can affect bone-implant integration, the success rate and survival rate of dental implants, peri-implant tissue health, and implant loss. Systematic reviews, with meta-analysis or not, about how systemic diseases and medications influence dental implant osseointegration, survival rate, success rate, and peri-implant diseases, published only in the English language, are electronically searched across the most important scientific databases. The present umbrella review includes eight systematic reviews, and osteoporosis and diabetes are the most investigated pathologies. Systemic diseases, such as neurologic disorders, HIV, hypothyroidism, cardiovascular diseases, and drugs, such as beta blockers, anti-hypertensives, or diuretics do not show a decreased rate of implant osseointegration. It seems that drugs, such as proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) or serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), negatively affect implant osseointegration. Few studies compare the effects of drugs and systemic diseases on the parameters considered in this overview. It is important to underline how the results of this review need to be validated with subsequent and more reviews.

Impact of Implant Diameter on the Early Survival Rate of Dental Implants in the Saudi Population: A One-Year Retrospective Study.

Introduction The use of dental implants provides a revolutionary solution to the problem of missing teeth in the oral cavity. The aim of this study was to assess the early implant survival rate in relation to implant diameter and site of placement. Methods The data were collected from 186 patients treated between January 2019 and June 2021. All the implants were evaluated and restored after three months of implant placement. The early implant survival was calculated for different implant diameters with the odds ratio (OR). Results A total of 373 implants were placed. Implants were placed in the following areas: upper posterior area (UPA), n = 123, upper anterior area (UAA), n = 49, lower posterior area (LPA), n = 184, and lower anterior area (LAA), n = 17. Implants of the following diameters were placed: 3.5 mm (n = 129), 4.3 mm (n = 166), and 5 mm (n = 78). The overall early survival rate was 97.32% after three months of placement. The highest early survival rate was at LAA (100%) and the lowest early survival rate was at UAA (95.9%). The implants 5 mm in diameter had the highest early survival rate (98.72%), while the implants 3.5 mm in diameter had the lowest early survival rate (94.57%). The ORs of the early implant survival were 4.7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96-23.05)] and 4.42 (95% CI: 0.53-36.61) for the 4.3 mm and 5 mm implants, respectively, with no statistical significance. Conclusions The implants placed in the oral cavity had acceptable survival rates regardless of implant diameter or site of placement.

Efficacy of leukocyte-platelet-rich fibrin membrane in immediate postextraction implant placement: A randomized controlled trial.

Background: Leukocyte-platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) membrane is an emerging autologous healing biomaterial that promotes angiogenesis and healing in immediate implant sites. The purpose of the study was to evaluate hard and soft tissue outcomes of immediate implant placement with or without L-PRF. Materials and Methods: A total of 18 immediate implants were divided randomly into two groups of 9 implants each, i.e., Group 1 and Group 2. All sites received a definitive restoration after 3 months of implant placement and were followed up for a period of 6-months. Results: Addition of L-PRF in the extraction sockets when placing immediate implants resulted in statistically nonsignificant benefit in terms of clinical and radiographic parameters when compared to immediate implant placement without L-PRF. Conclusion: Immediate implant placement in Group 2 demonstrated marginal but statistically significant benefit as compared to sites in Group 1.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MODELS SHOW POTENTIAL IN RECOGNIZING THE DENTAL IMPLANT TYPE, PREDICTING IMPLANT SUCCESS, AND OPTIMIZING IMPLANT DESIGN.

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Vyas S, Barmak BA, Galluci GO,Att W, Krishnamurthy VR. J. Artificial intelligence applications in implant dentistry: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2021:(21);S0022-3913. SOURCE OF FUNDING: Note reported. TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN: Systematic review.

The use of autologous bone for augmentation procedures leads to low prevalence of peri-implantitis-a retrospective study over a 20-year period.

The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of peri-implantitis in implants inserted into pristine bone (control) to implants where autologous bone was used for grafting procedures (study). All patients who underwent implant surgery during a 20 years interval by one maxillofacial implant surgeon and received a prosthodontic rehabilitation afterwards were eligible for inclusion in the study. Periimplant bone resorption and periimplant disease were assessed. Of 421 patients 384 (91.2%) patients responded to a recall after having been treated over a 20-year period by one maxillofacial surgeon and several dentists. A total of 110 patients had 239 implants in pristine bone, and 274 patients had 607 implants placed in combination with autologous bone grafting procedures. Mean time in function was 74 months (range 15-236 months). In all, 342 implants (34.8%) were in function for longer than 7 years. A total of 64 implant sites (7.6%) in 39 patients (10.2%) showed signs of peri-implant mucositis. In addition, 17 implants (2.0%) in 14 patients (3.6%) revealed signs of peri-implantitis, of which five implants were in the control group (2.09%) whereas 12 implants were in the study group (1.98%), with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.8405). More than half of the patients with peri-implantitis had a history of periodontitis. Three implants were lost due to peri-implantitis and four implants failed for other reasons, resulting in an overall success rate of 99.2% in 846 implants. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the study it seems that the use of autologous bone still is a relevant option when performing augmentation procedures because of the low prevalence of peri-implantitis.

Dental Implants in Patients with Osteogenesis Imperfecta - Clinical and Radiographic Outcome in Six Patients.

PURPOSE: To investigate the survival rate of dental implants in patients diagnosed with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study is a retrospective analysis of six individuals (2 males, 4 females) with OI (type I, III and IV) with a total of 25 dental implants. Clinical examination included plaque index, gingival index, periodontal pocket depth for each implant, presence of pus, and loosening of the implant(s). Marginal bone loss was measured on radiographs. The observation period ranged from 2-17 years (mean:7.5 years, median: 5 years). RESULTS: The overall implant survival rate was 80%. One patient with OI type III lost five implants. However, four out of five lost implants functioned for 11 years. CONCLUSION: Dental implant treatment seems to be a valid option for replacing missing teeth in OI patients. It is recommended that patients diagnosed with OI undergo the same preoperative evaluation as regular dental implant patients with special emphasis on a healthy periodontal status and ideal oral hygiene.

Clinical Evaluation of the Relationship Between Systemic Disease and the Time of Onset of Peri-Implantitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

The role of systemic diseases in the development and progression of peri-implantitis remains unclear and requires discussion from various perspectives. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate whether the type of systemic disease affects the onset time of peri-implantitis. The cohort consisted of patients who underwent implant maintenance evaluations between January 1998 and June 2020. Information on age, sex, history of periodontal disease, smoking habits, body mass index, systemic diseases, implant placement sites, and diagnosis of peri-implantitis were obtained. The relationships between the time of onset of peri-implantitis and the medical history of systemic diseases were determined statistically by applying the Kaplan-Meier analysis method and log-rank test. A total of 216 implants in 89 patients (34 male and 55 female) were included in this study. The average patient age was 53.9 ± 11.8 years at the first visit, and the mean duration of maintenance was 7 years and 4 months. A total of 43 patients had medical histories and were assigned to the systemic disease group. In this group, the overall prevalence of peri-implantitis was 25.4% (29 of 114 implants). The medical history of systemic diseases (odds ratio [OR], 6.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.37-19.9) and dental history of periodontitis (OR, 3.64; 95% CI, 1.25-10.6) were assessed as risk factors for peri-implantitis. A significant difference in the time of onset of peri-implantitis was confirmed between patients with systemic disease and healthy patients. Diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, and hypertension had a significant impact on the earlier onset of peri-implantitis.