Prevalence of Decay and Tooth Condition Changes Adjacent to Restored Dental Implants: A Retrospective Radiographic Study.

Ahmad Kutkut, Ryan White, Mohammad Awad, James Brown, Lina Sharab, Gregory S Hawk, Craig S Miller
{"title":"Prevalence of Decay and Tooth Condition Changes Adjacent to Restored Dental Implants: A Retrospective Radiographic Study.","authors":"Ahmad Kutkut, Ryan White, Mohammad Awad, James Brown, Lina Sharab, Gregory S Hawk, Craig S Miller","doi":"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-24-00044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined the association between a dental implant and changes in adjacent teeth over time. Electronic health records of 1818 patients who received a dental implant were retrospectively evaluated over 14 years (2005-2019) in a university setting. The status of the adjacent tooth and vertical and horizontal distance from the implant platform to adjacent teeth were determined using digital intraoral radiographs taken at baseline and the last follow-up visit (1-14 years, median 4 years). In total, 1085 dental implants were evaluated. There were 234 instances of a change in the adjacent tooth. Decay was observed in 83 (7.6%) of adjacent teeth; the mean time to development was 4 years (range 1-14 years). Approximately 9% of adjacent teeth received direct restorations, 4.8% received indirect restorations, 1% received endodontic root canal treatment, and 5.6% were extracted. The mean horizontal distance between the implant platform and the adjacent teeth was 3.56 mm; the mean vertical distance from the contact point to the alveolar crest on the tooth side was 6.2 mm at the first time of the reported decay on X ray. These distances did not significantly influence the occurrence of caries. The prevalence of interproximal contact loss was higher on the mesial of the implant crown at 63% compared with 20% on the distal side. This large retrospective analysis identified that teeth adjacent to a dental implant were at risk of decay and changes in their condition. In addition, the implant-to-tooth distance and inadequate emergence profile may contribute as caries risk factors in addition to hygiene and a high sugar level diet. These findings appear essential for clinicians when making treatment decisions and discussing outcomes with patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":519890,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of oral implantology","volume":" ","pages":"474-480"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of oral implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-24-00044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examined the association between a dental implant and changes in adjacent teeth over time. Electronic health records of 1818 patients who received a dental implant were retrospectively evaluated over 14 years (2005-2019) in a university setting. The status of the adjacent tooth and vertical and horizontal distance from the implant platform to adjacent teeth were determined using digital intraoral radiographs taken at baseline and the last follow-up visit (1-14 years, median 4 years). In total, 1085 dental implants were evaluated. There were 234 instances of a change in the adjacent tooth. Decay was observed in 83 (7.6%) of adjacent teeth; the mean time to development was 4 years (range 1-14 years). Approximately 9% of adjacent teeth received direct restorations, 4.8% received indirect restorations, 1% received endodontic root canal treatment, and 5.6% were extracted. The mean horizontal distance between the implant platform and the adjacent teeth was 3.56 mm; the mean vertical distance from the contact point to the alveolar crest on the tooth side was 6.2 mm at the first time of the reported decay on X ray. These distances did not significantly influence the occurrence of caries. The prevalence of interproximal contact loss was higher on the mesial of the implant crown at 63% compared with 20% on the distal side. This large retrospective analysis identified that teeth adjacent to a dental implant were at risk of decay and changes in their condition. In addition, the implant-to-tooth distance and inadequate emergence profile may contribute as caries risk factors in addition to hygiene and a high sugar level diet. These findings appear essential for clinicians when making treatment decisions and discussing outcomes with patients.

修复后的种植牙邻近牙齿龋坏和牙齿状况变化的发生率:回顾性放射摄影研究。
本研究探讨了种植牙与邻近牙齿随时间变化之间的关系。研究人员对一所大学环境中 1818 名接受过牙科植入手术的患者 14 年(2005-2019 年)的电子健康记录进行了回顾性评估。通过在基线和最后一次随访(1-14 年,中位数为 4 年)时拍摄的数字化口内X光片,确定了邻牙的状态以及种植体平台与邻牙之间的垂直和水平距离。总共对 1085 个种植体进行了评估。有 234 例邻近牙齿发生了变化。83颗(7.6%)邻牙出现龋坏;龋坏发生的平均时间为四年(1-14年不等)。约 9% 的邻牙接受了直接修复,4.8% 接受了间接修复,1% 接受了牙髓根管治疗 (RCT),5.6% 被拔除。种植体平台与邻牙之间的平均水平距离为 3.56 毫米;在 X 光片上首次报告蛀牙时,接触点与牙侧牙槽嵴之间的平均垂直距离为 6.2 毫米。这些距离对龋病的发生没有明显影响。种植体牙冠中侧的近端间接触丧失(ICL)发生率较高,为63%,而远端为20%。这项大型回顾性分析发现,与种植体相邻的牙齿存在龋坏和状况改变的风险。此外,除了卫生和高糖饮食外,种植体与牙齿的距离和不适当的萌出外形也可能是龋齿的危险因素。这些研究结果对于临床医生做出治疗决定和与患者讨论治疗结果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信