Immediate loading of fixed cross-arch prostheses supported by flapless-placed 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants: 5-year results from a randomised controlled trial.

Q1 Dentistry
Gioacchino Cannizzaro, Pietro Felice, Daniela Rita Ippolito, Eugenio Velasco-Ortega, Marco Esposito
{"title":"Immediate loading of fixed cross-arch prostheses supported by flapless-placed 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants: 5-year results from a randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Gioacchino Cannizzaro,&nbsp;Pietro Felice,&nbsp;Daniela Rita Ippolito,&nbsp;Eugenio Velasco-Ortega,&nbsp;Marco Esposito","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported either by 5 mm long or 11.5 mm long implants placed flapless and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty patients with edentulous or to-be- rendered edentulous mandibles, and 30 with edentulous maxillas, having sufficient bone to allow the placement of four and six implants respectively, of at least 11.5 mm long, were randomised according to a parallel group design into two equal groups and received either 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants at one centre. Implants had a diameter of 5 mm, were to be placed flapless, and with an insertion torque of at least 50 Ncm. Mandibles received four implants between the mental foramina. Implants were to be immediately loaded with metal-resin definitive prostheses the same day as implant placement. Patients were followed to 5 years post-loading and the outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four patients per group dropped out. Two prostheses were remade, one on short maxillary implants and one on long mandibular implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.15; P = 1.000). Three patients lost six short implants vs three patients who lost four long implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.19; P = 1.000). Four short implant patients were affected by complications vs five patients with long implants (difference in proportions = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.25; P = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for prostheses failures, implant failures and complications. Patients with mandibular short implants lost on average 0.22 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years while patients with long mandibular implants lost 0.83 mm. Patients with maxillary short implants lost on average 0.30 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years and patients with long maxillary implants lost 0.89 mm. Short implants showed less bone loss when compared with long implants and the differences up to 5 years were statistically significant both in maxillae (mean difference = 0.59 mm, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.86 mm, P < .0001) and in mandibles (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Flapless-placed 5 mm long implants achieved similar results as 11.5 mm long implants when supporting immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses both in maxillae and mandibles up to 5 years after loading. These results must be confirmed by other trials, and 10 years post-loading data is necessary before making reliable recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":49259,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":"11 3","pages":"295-306"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported either by 5 mm long or 11.5 mm long implants placed flapless and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.

Materials and methods: Thirty patients with edentulous or to-be- rendered edentulous mandibles, and 30 with edentulous maxillas, having sufficient bone to allow the placement of four and six implants respectively, of at least 11.5 mm long, were randomised according to a parallel group design into two equal groups and received either 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants at one centre. Implants had a diameter of 5 mm, were to be placed flapless, and with an insertion torque of at least 50 Ncm. Mandibles received four implants between the mental foramina. Implants were to be immediately loaded with metal-resin definitive prostheses the same day as implant placement. Patients were followed to 5 years post-loading and the outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.

Results: Four patients per group dropped out. Two prostheses were remade, one on short maxillary implants and one on long mandibular implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.15; P = 1.000). Three patients lost six short implants vs three patients who lost four long implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.19; P = 1.000). Four short implant patients were affected by complications vs five patients with long implants (difference in proportions = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.25; P = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for prostheses failures, implant failures and complications. Patients with mandibular short implants lost on average 0.22 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years while patients with long mandibular implants lost 0.83 mm. Patients with maxillary short implants lost on average 0.30 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years and patients with long maxillary implants lost 0.89 mm. Short implants showed less bone loss when compared with long implants and the differences up to 5 years were statistically significant both in maxillae (mean difference = 0.59 mm, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.86 mm, P < .0001) and in mandibles (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Flapless-placed 5 mm long implants achieved similar results as 11.5 mm long implants when supporting immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses both in maxillae and mandibles up to 5 years after loading. These results must be confirmed by other trials, and 10 years post-loading data is necessary before making reliable recommendations.

即刻加载无瓣放置5毫米或11.5毫米长种植体支持的固定交叉弓假体:来自5年随机对照试验的结果。
目的:比较5mm长种植体和11.5 mm长种植体无瓣放置后立即用金属树脂螺钉保留的弓间假体修复的效果。材料和方法:30例下颌无牙或拟无牙患者和30例上颌无牙患者,根据平行组设计随机分为两组,分别放置4个和6个至少11.5毫米长的种植体,并在一个中心接受5毫米或11.5毫米长的种植体。植入物直径为5mm,放置无襟翼,插入扭矩至少为50ncm。下颌骨在颏孔之间植入了四个植入物。种植体放置当天立即装载金属树脂确定假体。患者在加载后随访5年,结果测量为:假体和种植体失败、并发症和种植体周围边缘骨水平变化。结果:每组4例患者退出。2个假体重建,1个上颌短种植体,1个下颌骨长种植体(比例差异= 0;95% CI: -0.15 ~ 0.15;P = 1.000)。3例患者丢失了6个短种植体,3例患者丢失了4个长种植体(比例差异= 0;95% CI: -0.19 ~ 0.19;P = 1.000)。4例短种植体患者出现并发症,5例长种植体患者出现并发症(比例差异= 0.04;95% CI: -0.17 ~ 0.25;P = 1.000)。假体失败、种植体失败和并发症的发生率无统计学差异。下颌短种植体患者5年时种植体周围骨平均损失0.22 mm,而下颌长种植体患者5年时种植体周围骨平均损失0.83 mm。上颌短种植体患者5年时种植体周围骨平均损失0.30 mm,上颌长种植体患者5年时种植体周围骨平均损失0.89 mm。与长种植体相比,短种植体的骨丢失较少,并且在上颌(平均差异= 0.59 mm, 95% CI: 0.33 ~ 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001)和下颌骨(平均差异= 0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.36 ~ 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001)的差异在5年内均具有统计学意义。结论:无瓣放置5mm长种植体与11.5 mm长种植体在上颌和下颌骨即刻加载交叉弓假体后5年的支持效果相似。这些结果必须通过其他试验来证实,并且在提出可靠的建议之前需要10年的加载后数据。
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
European Journal of Oral Implantology
European Journal of Oral Implantology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.35
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信