Clinical Study of Flap Design to Increase the Keratinized Gingiva Around Implants: 4-Year Follow-Up

2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni B Bruschi ◽  
Roberto Crespi ◽  
Paolo Capparé ◽  
Enrico Gherlone
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Partial Thickness ◽  
Keratinized Tissue ◽  
Flap Design ◽  
Keratinized Mucosa ◽  
Over Time

Since the presence of keratinized gingiva is so important for peri-implant outcome, the aim of this study is to describe a partial thickness flap design to increase the amount of keratinized peri-implant tissue as well as its thickness. A total of 131 implants were placed in 85 patients: 103 implants (78.63%) in the mandible and 28 implants (21.37%) in the maxilla. Before implant placement in edentulous ridge the residual keratinized mucosa usually was measured with a periodontal probe in a buccal–palatal direction. A palatal or lingual incision was made to raise a partial thickness flap with the residual keratinized tissue. After implant placement the flap was apically repositioned and secured with loose periosteal sutures. Keratinized tissue levels were calculated at baseline, at 6 months, and every year follow-up. Measurements were reported for each implant diameter. At 4-year follow-up, implant survival rate of 87.79% was reported. Peri-implant keratinized mucosa confirmed clinical gain in all cases; mean levels at 1- and 4-year follow-ups were 7.26 ± 2.01 mm and 7.37 ± 2.12 mm, respectively. The levels remained stable over time. This flap design allows immediate correction of adaptation of the keratinized tissue around the implant, increasing the thickness and amount of the keratinized tissue.

Survival rate and cervical bone loss of implants placed in non vascularized iliac graft after segmental mandibulectomy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbas Karimi ◽  
Khatere Arian Rad ◽  
Hassan Mir Mohammad Sadeghi ◽  
Mahboube Hasheminasab
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Cumulative Survival ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Mandibular Defect ◽  
Segmental Mandibulectomy ◽  
Loss Level

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate and the amount of periimplant bone loss in implants placed in free iliac graft following segmental mandible resection. Materials and Methods: Over a 5-year period between 2010 and 2015, nine patients with odontogenic tumors who were candidate for segmental mandible resection were enrolled in this study. Resection defect was immediately reconstructed with non-vascularized iliac graft and 4-6 months later 36 implants of 5 different brands were inserted in grafted mandibles. Information regarding implant survival, peri implant bone loss or inflammation for a mean follow up period of 33 months was obtained. Results: One implant was failed out of 36 implants and the cumulative survival rate of implants was 97.2% in this follow up period. There was no sign of peri implant inflammation or gingival recession or BOP in any patients. The cervical bone loss level varied between 0.6 to 12mm (the length of failed implant) with the average of 0.96 mm. The bone loss level of survived implants varied between 0.6to 1.72mm with average of 0.64mm. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that reconstruction of segmental mandibular defect with non vascularized iliac graft followed by dental implant placement is an effective and predictable method to restore oral function.

scholarly journals Clinical Advantages and Limitations of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Full Arch Implant Supported Reconstruction: Case Series

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joao Carames ◽  
Loana Tovar Suinaga ◽  
Yung Cheng Paul Yu ◽  
Alejandro Pérez ◽  
Mary Kang
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
High Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Monolithic Zirconia

Purpose. The purpose of this retrospective case series is to evaluate the clinical advantages and limitations of monolithic zirconia restorations for full arch implant supported restorations and report the rate of complications up to 2 years after insertion.Materials and Methods. Fourteen patients received implant placement for monolithic zirconia full arch reconstructions. Four implants were placed in seven arches, eleven arches received six implants, two arches received seven implants, two arches received eight implants, and one arch received nine implants.Results. No implant failures or complications were reported for an implant survival rate of 100% with follow-up ranging from 3 to 24 months.Conclusions. Monolithic zirconia CAD-/CAM-milled framework restorations are a treatment option for full arch restorations over implants, showing a 96% success rate in the present study. Some of the benefits are accuracy, reduced veneering porcelain, and minimal occlusal adjustments. The outcome of the present study showed high success in function, aesthetics, phonetics, and high patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals The success of immediate implant placement with Zero insertion torque

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samy Aboelyazied Elian
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Insertion Torque ◽  
Torque Measurement ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Maxillary Bone ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Immediate Implant

Abstract Background The primary stability in immediate implant placement was considered one of the prerequisites for the achievement of good osseointgration. The insertion torque varies between cases depending on many factors and may goes down to Zero that may affect the prognosis of the implant especially in the soft maxillary bone. The aim of the study was to assess clinically the success&/or failure of immediate flapless implant placement in the maxilla with Zero insertion torque measurement with a follow up time ranging 2-4 years. Results: out of 780 analyzed, fourteen implants were placed in fresh extraction sockets for single rooted teeth in the maxilla and did not get primary stability (zero insertion torque). Their survival rate was 85.7%. Conclusions: The loss of torque during immediate implant placement to Zero may jeopardize the survival of the implants, but it may not be statistically significant with their failure and loss. The lack of certain conditions that are absent during their surgical installation and healing have the major effects on success. The implant primary stability is not an absolute prerequisite to osseointegration; however, it may affect the implant survival rate. Key words: 0 torque implant insertion, implant primary stability, loose implant, immediate implant survival, immediate implant placement.

scholarly journals Simultaneous implant placement with autogenous onlay bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Ma ◽  
Chaoan Wu ◽  
Miaoting Shao
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement ◽  
Onlay Grafts

AbstractSeveral authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian–Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5–5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5–5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

scholarly journals Short (6 mm) and Regular Dental Implants in the Posterior Maxilla–7-Years Follow-up Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 940
Author(s):  
Jakub Hadzik ◽  
Paweł Kubasiewicz-Ross ◽  
Izabela Nawrot-Hadzik ◽  
Tomasz Gedrange ◽  
Artur Pitułaj ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Survival Rate ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Bone Level

Short 6 mm dental implants are considered as an alternative to the maxillary sinus elevation and bone augmentation procedure where there is a reduced alveolar ridge height. The aim of this study was to compare the implant survival rate between short dental implants (6 mm) and regular length implants (11–13 mm) when placed in combination with bone grafting and loaded with a single non splinted crown, seven years after placing the implant. It was conducted as a controlled clinical study of 30 patients with partial edentulism in the posterior maxilla. The protocol included radiological and clinical evaluation of the C/I ratio (length of the superstructure divided by the length of the implant crestal part), marginal bone level (MBL), ultrasonography measurement of soft tissue surrounding implant (STT), patient-reported outcomes, and biological and technical complications. A total number of 28 implants (93%) remained integrated during follow-up period. MBL of 0.50 and 0.52 mm was observed for short implants and regular implants, respectively. MBL was checked for correlation with STT, and a negative correlation was found between MBL: STT. Our study has demonstrated a significantly lower implant survival rate for short implants compared to regular implants (87% compared to 100%). Despite the loss of several implants, good clinical results were achieved in the remaining implants in both groups. It is, therefore, worth considering short implants as an alternative to regular implants with a sinus lift surgery.

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.

Neurosensory function and implant survival rate following implant placement with nerve transpositioning: A case study.

2001 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minoru Hori ◽  
Takako Sato ◽  
Katsuhiko Kaneko ◽  
Masahiro Okaue ◽  
Mitsuhiko Matsumoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Implant Survival Rate

Trapeziometacarpal total joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: 199 patients with a minimum of 10 years follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 443-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Martin-Ferrero ◽  
Clarisa Simón-Pérez ◽  
Maria B. Coco-Martín ◽  
Aureliio Vega-Castrillo ◽  
Héctor Aguado-Hernández ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Total Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Hand Function ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Cumulative Survival

We report outcomes of 228 consecutive patients with total joint arthroplasty using the Arpe® prosthesis, among which 216 trapeziometacarpal joints in 199 patients had a minimum of 10 years follow-up. The cumulative survival rate of the 216 implants at 10 years using the Kaplan–Meyer method was 93%. Two hundred joints were functional and painless. We found good integration and positioning of the components in 184 (93%) of the joints. Sixteen prostheses failed. We conclude that this implant has acceptable long-term survival rate and restores good hand function. We also report our methods to improve implant survival and to decrease the risk of component malpositioning, and failure rate. Level of evidence: II

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document