Cargando…

Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Short and ultra‐short implants represent a predictable treatment, in terms of implant survival, with patients presenting insufficient available bone volumes. Moreover, single crown restorations represent a gold standard in terms of oral hygiene. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lombardo, Giorgio, Signoriello, Annarita, Marincola, Mauro, Liboni, Pietro, Bonfante, Estevam A., Nocini, Pier F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34796619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13054
_version_ 1784751026758221824
author Lombardo, Giorgio
Signoriello, Annarita
Marincola, Mauro
Liboni, Pietro
Bonfante, Estevam A.
Nocini, Pier F.
author_facet Lombardo, Giorgio
Signoriello, Annarita
Marincola, Mauro
Liboni, Pietro
Bonfante, Estevam A.
Nocini, Pier F.
author_sort Lombardo, Giorgio
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Short and ultra‐short implants represent a predictable treatment, in terms of implant survival, with patients presenting insufficient available bone volumes. Moreover, single crown restorations represent a gold standard in terms of oral hygiene. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate implant survival, marginal bone loss, and peri‐implant complications in 333 locking‐taper short and ultra‐short implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants were placed in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions of 142 patients. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 5‐year recall appointments. RESULTS: All implants placed consisted of 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length, 38.14%, 34.53%, and 27.33%, respectively. Three hundred thirty‐two implants (one early failure) were rehabilitated with single crowns in 141 patients. In 45.48% of the implants the crown‐to‐implant ratio was ≥2, with a mean value of 1.94. Overall implant‐based survival after 5 years of follow‐up was 96.10%: 96.85%, 95.65%, and 95.60% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.82). Overall patient‐based survival was 91.55%. Regarding crestal bone level variations, average crestal bone loss and apical shift of the “first bone‐to‐implant contact point” position were 0.69 and 0.01 mm, respectively. Setting the threshold for excessive bone loss at 1 mm, during the time interval from loading to follow‐up, 28 implants experienced loss of supporting bone greater than 1 mm: 19 of them (67.85%) were surgically treated with a codified surgical regenerative protocol. After 60 months, a peri‐implantitis prevalence of 5.94% was reported, with an overall implant success of 94.06%: 95.93%, 92.73%, and 93.10% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Long‐term outcomes suggest that short and ultra‐short locking‐taper implants can be successfully restored with single crowns in the posterior area of the maxilla and mandible.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9299664
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92996642022-07-21 Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study Lombardo, Giorgio Signoriello, Annarita Marincola, Mauro Liboni, Pietro Bonfante, Estevam A. Nocini, Pier F. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Original Articles BACKGROUND: Short and ultra‐short implants represent a predictable treatment, in terms of implant survival, with patients presenting insufficient available bone volumes. Moreover, single crown restorations represent a gold standard in terms of oral hygiene. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate implant survival, marginal bone loss, and peri‐implant complications in 333 locking‐taper short and ultra‐short implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants were placed in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions of 142 patients. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 5‐year recall appointments. RESULTS: All implants placed consisted of 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length, 38.14%, 34.53%, and 27.33%, respectively. Three hundred thirty‐two implants (one early failure) were rehabilitated with single crowns in 141 patients. In 45.48% of the implants the crown‐to‐implant ratio was ≥2, with a mean value of 1.94. Overall implant‐based survival after 5 years of follow‐up was 96.10%: 96.85%, 95.65%, and 95.60% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.82). Overall patient‐based survival was 91.55%. Regarding crestal bone level variations, average crestal bone loss and apical shift of the “first bone‐to‐implant contact point” position were 0.69 and 0.01 mm, respectively. Setting the threshold for excessive bone loss at 1 mm, during the time interval from loading to follow‐up, 28 implants experienced loss of supporting bone greater than 1 mm: 19 of them (67.85%) were surgically treated with a codified surgical regenerative protocol. After 60 months, a peri‐implantitis prevalence of 5.94% was reported, with an overall implant success of 94.06%: 95.93%, 92.73%, and 93.10% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Long‐term outcomes suggest that short and ultra‐short locking‐taper implants can be successfully restored with single crowns in the posterior area of the maxilla and mandible. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-11-18 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9299664/ /pubmed/34796619 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13054 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Lombardo, Giorgio
Signoriello, Annarita
Marincola, Mauro
Liboni, Pietro
Bonfante, Estevam A.
Nocini, Pier F.
Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title_full Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title_fullStr Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title_short Survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5‐year retrospective study
title_sort survival rates of ultra‐short (<6 mm) compared with short locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: a 5‐year retrospective study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34796619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13054
work_keys_str_mv AT lombardogiorgio survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy
AT signorielloannarita survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy
AT marincolamauro survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy
AT libonipietro survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy
AT bonfanteestevama survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy
AT nocinipierf survivalratesofultrashort6mmcomparedwithshortlockingtaperimplantssupportingsinglecrownsinposteriorareasa5yearretrospectivestudy