Cargando…

What do sales data tell us about implant survival?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of implant diameter, length and shape on a surrogate parameter of implant survival; i.e. the implant return rate in a big data analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted and the factors influencing the success r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seemann, Rudolf, Jirku, Alexander, Wagner, Florian, Wutzl, Arno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5319692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28222128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171128
_version_ 1782509415935508480
author Seemann, Rudolf
Jirku, Alexander
Wagner, Florian
Wutzl, Arno
author_facet Seemann, Rudolf
Jirku, Alexander
Wagner, Florian
Wutzl, Arno
author_sort Seemann, Rudolf
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of implant diameter, length and shape on a surrogate parameter of implant survival; i.e. the implant return rate in a big data analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted and the factors influencing the success rates of 69,377 sold implants over a seven-year period were evaluated. The osseointegration program of a reseller provides reliable data of a single country. Implant loss rates were investigated using logistic regression models and regressed by implant type, diameter, and length. RESULTS: The return rate of 69,377 sold implants was 2.78% and comparable to implant loss rates in previous published prospective studies as its surrogate parameter. A total of 80% of implant returns had occurred within 157 days, and an additional 15% within 750.25 days. Diameters of 3.8 to 5.0mm showed the lowest return rates with its bottom in the 4.3mm implant whilst 6.0mm implants had significantly higher return rates. In comparison to the most sold implant length (13mm) shorter implants showed significantly higher early return rates. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that in cases of standard indications and sufficient bone, the use of screw typed dental implants with 3.8 or 4.3 diameter and 11 or 13 mm length shows the lowest implant return rates. Other implants may be selected only in specific indications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5319692
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53196922017-03-03 What do sales data tell us about implant survival? Seemann, Rudolf Jirku, Alexander Wagner, Florian Wutzl, Arno PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of implant diameter, length and shape on a surrogate parameter of implant survival; i.e. the implant return rate in a big data analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted and the factors influencing the success rates of 69,377 sold implants over a seven-year period were evaluated. The osseointegration program of a reseller provides reliable data of a single country. Implant loss rates were investigated using logistic regression models and regressed by implant type, diameter, and length. RESULTS: The return rate of 69,377 sold implants was 2.78% and comparable to implant loss rates in previous published prospective studies as its surrogate parameter. A total of 80% of implant returns had occurred within 157 days, and an additional 15% within 750.25 days. Diameters of 3.8 to 5.0mm showed the lowest return rates with its bottom in the 4.3mm implant whilst 6.0mm implants had significantly higher return rates. In comparison to the most sold implant length (13mm) shorter implants showed significantly higher early return rates. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that in cases of standard indications and sufficient bone, the use of screw typed dental implants with 3.8 or 4.3 diameter and 11 or 13 mm length shows the lowest implant return rates. Other implants may be selected only in specific indications. Public Library of Science 2017-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5319692/ /pubmed/28222128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171128 Text en © 2017 Seemann et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Seemann, Rudolf
Jirku, Alexander
Wagner, Florian
Wutzl, Arno
What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title_full What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title_fullStr What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title_full_unstemmed What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title_short What do sales data tell us about implant survival?
title_sort what do sales data tell us about implant survival?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5319692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28222128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171128
work_keys_str_mv AT seemannrudolf whatdosalesdatatellusaboutimplantsurvival
AT jirkualexander whatdosalesdatatellusaboutimplantsurvival
AT wagnerflorian whatdosalesdatatellusaboutimplantsurvival
AT wutzlarno whatdosalesdatatellusaboutimplantsurvival