Performance of sintered, porous-surfaced, press-fit implants after 10 years of function in the partially edentulous posterior mandible

International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 563-570

  Deporter, Douglas A ^a   Kermalli, Jaffer ^a   Todescan, Reynaldo ^b   Atenafu, Eshetu ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b NONE   (Canada)

^c HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL ABUTMENT; DENTAL SURGERY; DEVICE REMOVAL; EDENTULOUSNESS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; MANDIBLE; MIDDLE AGED; POROSITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURFACE PROPERTY; SURVIVAL; TOOTH CROWN; TOOTH IMPLANT; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; ALVEOLAR BONE LOSS; CROWNS; DENTAL IMPLANT-ABUTMENT DESIGN; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DEVICE REMOVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; JAW, EDENTULOUS, PARTIALLY; MALE; MANDIBLE; MIDDLE AGED; POROSITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOGRAPHY, BITEWING; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84872041738     PISSN: 01987569     EISSN: 19453388     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implant. Part I: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997; 8: 161-172.
2. Wyatt CC, Zarb G. Treatment outcomes of patients with implant-supported fixed partial prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13: 204-211.
3. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Duyck J, Quirynen M, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. Part I: A longitudinal clinical evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13: 381-389.
4. Scurria MS, Morgan ZV 4th, Guckes AD, Li S, Koch G. Prognostic variables associated with implant failure: A retrospective effectiveness study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998: 13: 400-406.
5. Hermann I, Lekholm U, Holm S, Kultje C. Evaluation of patient and implant characteristics as potential prognostic factors for oral implant failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20: 220-230.
6. das Neves FD, Fones D, Bernardes R, do Prado C, Neto AJ. Short implants-An analysis of longitudinal studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 86-93.
7. Renouard F, Nisand D. Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17(suppl 2): 35-51.
8. Anitua E, Orive G, Aguirre JJ, Andia I. Five-year clinical evaluation of short dental implants placed in posterior areas: A retrospective study. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 42-48.
9. Deporter DA, Pilliar RM, Todescan R, Watson PA, Pharoah M. Managing the posterior mandible of partially edentulous patients with short, porous-surfaced dental implants: Early data from a clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16: 653-658.
10. Van Steenberghe D, Lekholm U, Bolender C, et al. The applicability of osseointegrated oral implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: A prospective multicenter study on 558 fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990; 5: 272-281.
11. Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Oral implant surfaces: Part I-Review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17: 536-543.
12. Renouard F, Arnoux JP, Sarment D. Fivemm-diameter implants without a smooth surface collar: Report on 98 consecutive placements. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14: 101-107.
13. Iplikçioğlu H, Akça K. Comparative evaluation of the effect of diameter, length and number of implants supporting threeunit fixed partial prostheses on stress distribution in the bone. J Dent 2002; 30: 41-46.
14. Degidi M, Piattelli A, Carinci F. Clinical outcome of narrow diameter implants:A retrospective study of 510 implants. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 49-54.
15. Brink J, Meraw S, Sarment DP. Influence of implant diameter on surrounding bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 563-568.
16. Feldman S, Boitel N, Weng D, Kohles SS, Stach RM. Five-year survival distributions of short-length (10 mm or less) machinesurfaced and Osseotite implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2004; 6: 16-23.
17. Fugazzotto PA, Beagle JR, Ganeles J, Jaffin R, Vlassis J, Kumar A. The success and failure rates of 9 mm or shorter ITI implants in the replacement of missing maxillary molars when restored with individual crowns: Preliminary results in 0 to 84 months in function. A retrospective study. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 327-332.
18. Fugazzotto P. Shorter implants in clinical practice: Rationale and treatment results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 487-496.
19. Balshe AA, Assad DA, Eckert SE, Koka S, Weaver AL. A retrospective study of the survival of smooth-and rough-surface dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 1113-1118.
20. Calandriello R, Tomatis M, Rangert B. Immediate functional loading of Brånemark System implants with enhanced initial stability: A prospective 1-to 2-year clinical and radiographic study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5(suppl 1): 10-20.
21. Renouard F, Nisand D. Short implants in the severely resorbed maxilla: A 2-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005; 7(suppl 1):S104-S110.
22. Brocard D, Barthet P, Baysse E, et al. A multicenter report on 1,022 consecutively placed ITI implants: A 7-year longitudinal study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15: 691-700.
23. Tawil G, Younan R. Clinical evaluation of short, machined-surface implants followed for 12 to 92 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 894-901.
24. Arlin ML. Short dental implants as a treatment option: Results from an observational study in a single private practice. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 769-776.
25. Maló P, de Arújo Nobre M, Rangert B. Short implants placed one-stage in maxillae and mandibles: A retrospective clinical study with 1 to 9 years of follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2007; 9: 15-21.
26. Spray JR, Black CG, Morris HH, Ochi S. The influence of bone thickness on facial marginal bone response: Stage 1 placement through stage 2 uncovering. Ann Periodontol 2000; 5: 119-128.
27. Qahash M, Susin C, Polimeni G, Hall J, Wikesjö U. Bone healing dynamics at buccal peri-implant sites. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 166-172.
28. Wennström JL, Bengazi F, Lekholm U. The influence of the masticatory mucosa on the peri-implant soft tissue condition. Clin Oral Implants Res 1994; 5: 1-8.
29. Block MS, Gardiner D, Kent JN, Misiek DJ, Finger IM, Guerra L. Hydroxyapatitecoated cylindrical implants in the posterior mandible: 10-year observations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996; 11: 626-633.
30. Bouri A Jr, Bissada N, Al-Zahrani MS, Faddoul F, Nouneh I. Width of keratinized gingiva and the health status of the supporting tissues around dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 323-326.
31. Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, Puisys A. The influence of soft tissue thickness on crestal bone changes around implants:A 1-year prospective controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 712-719.
32. Deporter D, Al-Sayyed A, Pilliar RM, Valiquette N. "Biologic width" and crestal bone remodeling with sintered poroussurfaced dental implants. A study in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 544-550.
33. MacDonald K, Pharoah M, Todescan R, Deporter D. Use of sintered porous-surfaced dental implants to restore single teeth in the maxilla: A 7-to 9-year followup. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2009; 29: 191-199.
34. Deporter D, Ogiso B, Sohn DS, Ruljancich K, Pharoah M. Ultrashort sintered poroussurfaced dental implants used to replace posterior teeth. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 1280-1286.