scholarly journals The survival rates and risk factors of implants in the early stage: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Yang ◽  
Huiting Hu ◽  
Mianyan Zeng ◽  
Hongxing Chu ◽  
Zekun Gan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Bone Quality ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Early Survival ◽  
Immediate Implantation ◽  
Implant Length

Abstract Background Few large-sample studies in China have focused on the early survival of dental implants. The present study aimed to report the early survival rates of implants and determine the related influencing factors. Methods All patients receiving dental implants at our institution between 2006 and 2017 were included. The endpoint of the study was early survival rates of implants, according to gender, age, maxilla/mandible, dental position, bone augmentation, bone augmentation category, immediate implant, submerged implant category, implant diameter, implant length, implant torque, and other related factors. Initially, SPSS22.0 was used for statistical analysis. The Chi-square test was used to screen all factors, and those with p < 0.05 were further introduced into a multiple logistic regression model to illustrate the risk factors for early survival rates of implants. Results In this study, we included 1078 cases (601 males and 477 females) with 2053 implants. After implantation, 1974 implants were retained, and the early survival rate was 96.15%. Patients aged 30–60 years (OR  2.392), with Class I bone quality (OR  3.689), bone augmentation (OR  1.742), immediate implantation (OR  3.509), and implant length < 10 mm (OR  2.972), were said to possess risk factors conducive to early survival rates. Conclusions The early survival rate of implants in our cohort exceeded 96%, with risk factors including age, tooth position, bone quality, implant length, bone augmentation surgery, and immediate implantation. When the above factors coexist, implant placement should be treated carefully.

Risk Factors and Early Survival Rate of Biomet 3i Dental Implants. A Retrospective Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-14
Author(s):  
Rasoul Heidary Postkan ◽  
Mina Kahyaie Aghdam ◽  
Ali Momen ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Early Survival

scholarly journals Survival Rate of 1008 Short Dental Implants with 21 Months of Average Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 3943
Author(s):  
João Caramês ◽  
Ana Catarina Pinto ◽  
Gonçalo Caramês ◽  
Helena Francisco ◽  
Joana Fialho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
High Survival ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Clinical Records

This retrospective study evaluated the survival rate of short, sandblasted acid-etched surfaced implants with 6 and 8 mm lengths with at least 120 days of follow-up. Data concerning patient, implant and surgery characteristics were retrieved from clinical records. Sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA)-surfaced tissue-level 6 mm (TL6) or 8 mm (TL8) implants or bone-level tapered 8 mm (BLT8) implants were used. Absolute and relative frequency distributions were calculated for qualitative variables and mean values and standard deviations for quantitative variables. A Cox regression model was performed to verify whether type, length and/or width influence the implant survival. The cumulative implant survival rate was assessed by time-to-event analyses (Kaplan–Meier estimator). In all, 513 patients with a mean age of 58.00 ± 12.44 years received 1008 dental implants with a mean follow-up of 21.57 ± 10.77 months. Most implants (78.17%) presented a 4.1 mm diameter, and the most frequent indication was a partially edentulous arch (44.15%). The most frequent locations were the posterior mandible (53.97%) and the posterior maxilla (31.55%). No significant differences were found in survival rates between groups of type, length and width of implant with the cumulative rate being 97.7% ± 0.5%. Within the limitations of this study, the evaluated short implants are a predictable option with high survival rates during the follow-up without statistical differences between the appraised types, lengths and widths.

scholarly journals Evaluation the Success Rate, Survival Rate, and Tissue Health Indices around XiVE® Dental Implants Placed in Patients in a Dental Office in Isfahan

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Author(s):  
Mohammad Tavakoli ◽  
Mozhgan Izadi ◽  
Jaber Yaghini ◽  
Laleh Nazemi ◽  
Manizhe Mola
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Health Indices ◽  
Dental Office ◽  
Periodontal Index ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Periodontal Indices

Background and aims. Despite the very good results, implant treatment has also been associated with some failures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the success rate, survival rate, and tissue health indices around XiVE® dental implants placed in patients in a dental office in Isfahan. Materials and methods. In this cross-sectional study, 129 XiVE® dental implants were selected. A form was prepared by two periodontists for the collection of demographic information and assessment of soft- and hard-tissue health at the implant sites. Data were analyzed by t-test and the Wilcoxon test with SPSS20 statistical software; p = 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. Of the 129 implants, 57.3% were in males and 42.7% in females; of the total, 47.3% were maxillary, 52.7% mandibular, and 17.8% were single- and 82.2% multi-unit. Periodontal indices, except probing depth, were significantly lower around maxillary implants (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the left and right jaws in terms of periodontal index (p > 0.05). In all cases, the periodontal indices of dental implants were lower than those of the teeth and showed 100% success and survival rates. Conclusion. The results of this study showed 100% success and 2-year survival rates with XiVE® implants with healthy tissues surrounding the implants.

Detection of multidrug-resistant, gene-related proteins for postoperative individualized chemotherapy of gastric cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 156-156
Author(s):  
Pengfei Yu
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Topo Ii

156 Background: Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was beneficial for some patients,however, it may increase the treatment burden and reduce the immunity of other patients. Screening appropriate patients based on molecular markers for individualized adjuvant chemotherapy was necessary. Methods: Between June 2002 to June 2004, 119 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy were retrospectively analyzed. 61 patients had adjuvant chemotherapy based on platinum and 5-FU for 4 to 6 cycles. ToPo II negative, MRP positive and GST-π positive were regarded as three risk factors which may be associated with chemotherapy resistance and poor prognosis. Patients were divided into two groups: high-risk group (≥2 risk factors) and the low-risk group (<2 risk factors), and the tumor recurrence and patients’ survival time of the two groups were analyzed. Results: The average recurrence time of the low-risk group was significantly longer than that of the high-risk group (21.29 ± 11.10 VS 15.16 ± 8.05 months ,p<0.01).The 3-year and 5-year survival rate of the high-risk group was 57.4% and 42.6%, however, it had no significant difference compared to 66.2% and 58.5% of the low-risk group (P> 0.05). In the high-risk group, the 3-year survival rate of patients with/without chemotherapy were 62.1% and 52.0%, 5-year survival rates were 44.8% and 40.0%, but the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). In the low-risk group, the 3-year survival rate of patients with/without chemotherapy were 81.2% and 51.5%, 5-year survival rates were 71.9% and 45.5%, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusions: Combined determination of MDR-related proteins ToPo II, MRP and GST-π may be prospectively valuable for optimizing the chemotherapy regimes, and further predicting the outcomes of gastric cancer patients.

Retrospective Analysis of Dental Implants Placed Between 2012 and 2014: Indications, Risk Factors, and Early Survival

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 649-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koenraad Grisar ◽  
Deepti Sinha ◽  
Joseph Schoenaers ◽  
Titiaan Dormaar ◽  
Constantinus Politis
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Early Survival

scholarly journals An 11-Year Retrospective Research Study of the Predictive Factors of Peri-Implantitis and Implant Failure: Analytic-Multicentric Study of 1279 Implants in Peru

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Mayta-Tovalino ◽  
Yens Mendoza-Martiarena ◽  
Percy Romero-Tapia ◽  
María Álvarez-Paucar ◽  
Luis Gálvez-Calla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Bone Quality ◽  
Private Institutions ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Multicentric Study ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
History Of

Aim. To analyze the risk factors by logistic regression and perform the analysis of the survival rate of osseointegrated dental implants placed in public and private institutions. Methods. An analytic-multicentric study was carried out, where 1279 dental implants that were placed by specialists from January 2006 to October 2017 in public and private institutions (UPCH-SI, HCFAP, CMNAVAL, UPCH-SM, and UPSJB) were evaluated. The variables sex (X1), location (X2), hypertension (X3), antibiotic prophylaxis (X4), diabetes (X5), osteoporosis (X6), bisphosphonates (X7), history of periodontitis (X8), hypercholesterolemia (X9), bone quality (X10), bone quantity (X11), design (X12), smoker (X13), connection (X14), edentulism type (X15), staging (X16), 3D guided surgery (X17), load (X18), bone graft (X19), peri-implantitis (X20), mucositis (X21), and GBR (X22) were collected and analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. The logit analysis was performed among all the variables to choose the best statistical model that explains the true risk factors. The analysis was performed by multivariate logistic regression and the Kaplan–Meier test, at a level of statistical significance of p<0.05. Results. It was found that the failure rate of the 1279 implants evaluated was 17.98% corresponding to only 23 implants lost as they have good longevity over time. When establishing the best multivariate logistic regression model, it was found that the variables that remained stable in relation to their statistically significant value and more stable confidence intervals were age, osteoporosis, bisphosphonates, history of periodontitis, bone quality, bone graft, connection, number of implants, GBR (guided bone regeneration), and follow-up. Conclusions. Dental implants placed by specialists in public and private institutions had a failure rate similar to that in studies previously published in other countries.

scholarly journals Survival rate of cervical cancer from a study conducted in India

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ganesh Balasubramaniam ◽  
Rajshree H. Gaidhani ◽  
Arshi Khan ◽  
Sushama Saoba ◽  
Umesh Mahantshetty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Care Facility ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Stage Of Disease ◽  
Treatment Type ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Objectives: The incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer in the world are 13.1/105 and 6.9/105, respectively. In India, it is estimated that there are 96,922 new cervical cancer cases and 60,078 deaths and ranked second among women cancers. The incidence and mortality rates are 14.7/105 and 9.2/105, respectively, although the incidence varies within Indian population. The majority of these cervical patients report at a late-stage of disease in health-care facility due to lack of awareness. A premier tertiary cancer hospital in Mumbai conducted the present survival-study. The aim of the study was to assess the various factors that determine the survival outcomes by age at diagnosis, role of comorbidities, stage of disease, and treatment. Material and Methods: The main source of information was patients’ medical records from which the data were abstracted, and active follow-up was undertaken. 1678 cases diagnosed between the years 2006 and 2008 at Tata Memorial Hospital are analyzed using actuarial method for obtaining survival rates and log-rank tests for comparison of survival groups. Results: The 5-year survival rate was 76.0% for those aged ≤50 years, 73.3% for non-residents, 74.4% for literates, and 81.8% for Christians and 72.5% for those with squamous cell carcinoma histology; those with no comorbidities had marginally better survival than their counter-parts. The survival rates were 83.5%, 80.6%, 66.0%, and 37.1% for Stage I, Stage II, Stage III, and Stage IV, respectively. The best survival outcomes were for those treated with only surgery (95.6%), or in combination with either radiotherapy (90.6%) or with radiotherapy and chemotherapy (85.5%). Involvement of either nodes/sites had poorer survival than those with no-involvement. In the multivariate analysis, only stage of the disease emerged as a significant prognosis factor. Conclusion: The study concluded that younger patients, early stage of disease, non-involvement of any sites/ nodes, and radiotherapy either alone or in combination with other treatment type provided better outcomes. Early detection and prevention strategies are keys to obtain better outcomes.

Stage is a prognostic factor for surgically treated patients with early-stage lip cancer for whom a ‘wait and see’ policy in terms of neck status has been implemented

2017 ◽  
Vol 131 (10) ◽  
pp. 889-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Eskiizmir ◽  
E Ozgur ◽  
G Karaca ◽  
P Temiz ◽  
N Hacioglu Yanar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Locoregional Recurrence ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Tumour Stage ◽  
Lip Cancer ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Wait And See ◽  
Disease Free

AbstractObjectives:To determine the locoregional control and survival rates (in terms of risk factors) of patients who underwent surgical resection of early-stage lip cancer and for whom a ‘wait and see’ policy in terms of neck status had been implemented.Methods:The sociodemographic data, tumour stage, tumour characteristics and histopathological features of 41 patients with early-stage lip cancer were evaluated. Factors predictive of survival and locoregional recurrence were analysed. The five-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were determined, and the prognostic risk factors were compared.Results:The mean follow-up period was 60.5 months (range, 4–92 months). Age, sex, tumour stage, tumour thickness and volume, and perineural involvement were not predictive of locoregional recurrence or survival. Pathological tumour stage (T1vsT2) was a prognostic factor for both five-year overall survival (87.3vs65.6 per cent,p= 0.042) and disease-free survival (88.6vs65.6 per cent,p= 0.037).Conclusion:Tumour stage was clearly a major factor affecting the prognosis of surgically treated patients with early-stage lip cancer for whom a ‘wait and see’ policy in terms of neck status had been implemented.

scholarly journals Cholangiocarcinoma: Has There been Any Progress?

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Meza-Junco ◽  
Aldo J Montano-Loza ◽  
Mang Ma ◽  
Winnie Wong ◽  
Michael B Sawyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Liver Transplantation ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Surgical Resection ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation ◽  
Poor Survival ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Micrometastatic Disease

Cholangiocarcinoma is the second most common primary hepatic tumour after hepatocellular carcinoma. Primary sclerosing cholangitis is one of the most commonly recognized risk factors for cholangiocarcinoma; however, approximately 90% of patients have no identifiable risk factors. Extrahepatic type is its most common presentation. Cholangiocarcinoma is considered to be a devastating disease, with a poor survival rate and few therapeutic options. Although surgical resection has been considered the best treatment option for localized cholangiocarcinoma, local recurrences of this cancer are very common, and imply persistent micrometastatic disease in lymph nodes or at surgical margins, even after extended surgical resection. Consequently, the five-year survival rate after attempted curative resection is only 20% to 40%. Early studies of liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma did not show a survival benefit and, currently, this tumour is considered to be an absolute contraindication for liver transplantation in most transplant centres worldwide. Recently, neoadjuvant chemoradiation in combination with liver transplantation for highly selected patients with cholangiocarcinoma has shown impressive results, with five-year survival rates at approximately 76% to 82% – similar to other standard indications for liver transplantation, such as hepatocellular carcinoma or hepatitis C-induced cirrhosis. However, this success of liver transplantation applies to only a subset of patients and most of the data originated from a single centre. Wider application of this strategy, especially for patients with potentially resectable disease, will require validation by other centres.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document