Clinical observation of the curative effect after 5-year follow-up of single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region

  • Feng LIANG ,
  • Min-jie WU ,
  • Li-dong ZOU
Expand
  • Second Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100101, China

Received date: 2019-09-18

  Online published: 2021-10-11

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the clinical curative effect after 5-year follow-up of single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region. Methods: In the study, patients with single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region after loading 5-year in the Second Clinical Division of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology from October 2005 to May 2010 was enrolled. The implant survival rate, prosthetic conditions (including the structural integrity or loosening of the prosthesis, the retention of the materials used to fill access holes of screw-retained implant crowns, loosening or fractures of the implant abutment or screw) and marginal bone lever level around implants were determined by clinical and radiographic examination. Results: The study was composed of 215 patients, the mean age was 48.6 years (range: 27 to 71), and 321 soft tissue implants were inserted. There were 9 implants loose and lost during the visit, the cumulative success rate was 97.2%. In the 312 remaining implants, 120 implants were placed in the upper jaws (38.5%) and 192 in the lower jaws (61.5%). Three different diameters as 3.3 mm (5 implants), 4.1 mm (115 implants) and 4.8 mm (192 implants) and three different lengths as 8 mm (21 implants), 10 mm (206 implants) and 12 mm (85 implants) were used, respectively. 277 (88.8%) cement-retained and 35 (11.2%) screw-retained implant-supported single crowns were made. The marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants after loading 5 years in the mesial and distal sides were (0.73±0.25) mm and (0.78±0.26) mm, respectively. There was no significant difference among MBL and bone quality, implant type, angle of abutment, prosthodontic type, crown-to-implant ratio, gender, and age of the patients (P>0.05). The major mechanical complications after restoration involved loosening (8.6%) and fracture (2.9%) of the crown retainer screw, loss of resin covering the screw (11.4%), and the most frequent mechanical complications were loss of crown retention (14.1%) and fracture of porcelain (13.8%). The incidence of loss of crown retention was correlated with insufficient clinical crown height or using angle abutment (P<0.05). Conclusion: After loading 5 years, the bone level around the soft-tissue-implant placed in posterior region was stable. To minimize the frequency of mechanical complications after restoration, protocols must be established from diagnosis to the completion of treatment and follow up of implant-supported prostheses, especially in terms of adequate technical steps and careful radiographic evaluation of the components.

Cite this article

Feng LIANG , Min-jie WU , Li-dong ZOU . Clinical observation of the curative effect after 5-year follow-up of single tooth implant-supported restorations in the posterior region[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2021 , 53(5) : 970 -976 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.05.027

References

[1] Jung RE, Pjetrusson BE, Glauser R, et al. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2008, 19(2):119-130.
[2] Pjetursson BE, Thoma D, Jung R, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after a mean observation period of at least 5 years [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012, 23(Suppl 6):22-38.
[3] Zembic A, Kim S, Zwahlen M, et al. Systematic review of the survival rate and incidence of biologic, technical, and esthetic complications of single implant abutments supporting fixed prostheses [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014, 29(Suppl):99-116.
[4] Hjalmarsson L, Gheisarifar M, Jemt T. A systematic review of survival of single implants as presented in longitudinal studies with a follow-up of at least 10 years [J]. I Eur J Oral Implantol, 2016, 9(Suppl 1):S155-162.
[5] Garlini G, Chierichetti V, D’Amato S, et al. A long term follow-up of single-tooth Xive implant: 15 year results [J]. Dent Oral Craniofac Res, 2016, 3(1):1-4.
[6] Arunyanak SP, Pollini A, Ntounis A, et al. Clinician assessments and patient perspectives of single-tooth implant restorations in the esthetic zone of the maxilla: A systematic review [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2017, 118(1):10-17.
[7] Chrcanovic BR, Kisch J, Larsson C. Retrospective clinical evaluation of implant-supported single crowns: Mean follow-up of 15 years [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2019, 30(7):691-701
[8] 林野, 李健慧, 邱立新, 等. 口腔种植修复临床效果十年回顾研究 [J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2006, 41(3):131-135.
[9] 朱艳香, 程然, 林梓桐, 等. 上颌后牙区种植修复后6~9年临床疗效观察 [J]. 东南大学学报(医学版), 2017, 36(5):841-846.
[10] 张燕婷, 李悦, 何晶, 等. 上颌后牙区不同术式种植修复10年累计存留率及患者相关因素对其成功率的影响分析 [J]. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2017, 10(1):31-35.
[11] Wheeler SL, Holmes RE, Calhoun CJ. Six-year clinical and histologic study of sinus-lift grafts [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1996, 11(1):26-34.
[12] Renouard F, Nisand D. Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2006, 17(Suppl 2):35-51.
[13] Zimmermann J, Sommer M, Grize L, et al. Marginal bone loss 1 year after implantation: a systematic review for fixed and removable restorations [J]. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent, 2019, 11:195-218.
[14] Pellicer-Chover H, Díaz-Sanchez M, Soto-Penaloza D, et al. Impact of crestal and subcrestal implant placement upon changes in marginal peri-implant bone level: A systematic review [J]. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal, 2019, 24(5):673-683.
[15] Galindo-Moreno P, León-Cano A, Ortega-Oller I, et al. Marginal bone loss as success criterion in implant dentistry: beyond 2 mm [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015, 26(4):28-34.
Outlines

/