The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants最新文献

{"title":"Immediate Placement and Restoration of a Single Implant to Replace Two Adjacent Periodontally Compromised Mandibular Incisors: A Technique Report with up to 8 Years of Follow-up.","authors":"Francesco Amato, Giorgio A Spedicato","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10462","DOIUrl":"10.11607/jomi.10462","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the cumulative survival rate (CSR) and marginal bone loss (MBL) of single implants immediately placed and restored with two-unit cantilevered fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) following the extraction of two adjacent mandibular incisors with a compromised periodontal condition.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients in need of extraction and replacement of two adjacent mandibular incisors due to an advanced periodontal loss of attachment were treated consecutively. Following a flapless procedure, a single implant was placed at the time of extraction in one of the two fresh alveolar sockets and immediately restored with a screw-retained two-unit provisional FDP. The area of extraction was grafted using xenograft particulate material. The following elements were evaluated: the peri-implant soft and hard tissue condition at the last follow-up appointment, MBL at the last follow-up appointment at least 1 year after the delivery of the final prosthesis, and the final esthetic result.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 patients were recruited between January 2014 and December 2019 in a single private practice. Each of them received a single implant and immediate provisional restoration with a two-unit cantilevered FDP. Patients were followed up for 22 to 94 months (average follow-up = 4 years) and none of the implants failed, resulting in a 100% CSR. The cumulative MBL-measured using the VixWin Platinum software- was 1.08 ± 0.35 mm. A lower MBL was observed in the presence of platform switching (0.63 ± 0.11 mm) compared to the absence of platform switching (1.27 ± 0.20 mm).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The preliminary results obtained from this study suggest that patients who need to replace two adjacent periodontally compromised mandibular incisors can be treated with an immediately placed and restored single implant.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"51-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142335526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Does Implant Placement Below the Ridge Reduce Crestal Bone Loss? A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"Federica Altieri, Michele Cassetta","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10947","DOIUrl":"10.11607/jomi.10947","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the extent of crestal bone loss (CBL) at 2, 12, 36, and 60 months in implants placed with the shoulder at the equicrestal level and 2 mm below the alveolar ridge.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted by selecting subjects with a Kennedy Class IV partially edentulous mandible. Two implants of equal length and diameter were inserted, one equicrestal and the other subcrestal, in the lateral incisor sites. Using Rinn centering devices, intraoral periapical radiographs were taken at implant insertion (T0) and at 2 (T1), 12 (T2), 36 (T3), and 60 months (T4). Descriptive statistics and t test were used, with P ≤ .05 considered statistically significant. Twentyfive patients were recruited, with a mean age of 65 ± 9.88 years (range: 42 to 82 years), and none dropped out. A total of 50 implants were inserted, 25 at the crestal level and 25 at the subcrestal level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the 60-month follow-up, no implant or prosthetic failure was recorded. An average CBL of 0.81 ± 0.40 mm (range: 0.1 to 1.6 mm) was recorded in the crestal implant group, while the subcrestal implants had an average CBL of 0.87 ± 0.41 mm (range: 0.2 to 2 mm); however, the higher CBL in the subcrestal group was not statistically significant (P = .65). Comparing the mean CBL of both groups at the various follow-ups, greater crestal bone resorption was recorded in subcrestal implants between T0 and T1 (0.25 vs 0.1 mm) and between T1 and T2 (0.39 vs 0.23 mm), while in subsequent follow-ups, a greater and statistically significant (P = .01) CBL was recorded in equicrestal implants between T3 and T4 (0.05 vs 0.18 mm).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Thus, over time, the extent of CBL seems to be reduced in subcrestal implants, with bone retention above the implant shoulder. Although the position of the implant shoulder relative to the crestal ridge does not affect the CBL, subcrestal placement is recommended in order to reduce the risk of exposing the rough implant surface.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"41-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140905213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effect of Titanium Base Abutment Height and Restorative Material on Torque Maintenance of Hybrid Abutment Restorations with Offset Implant Placement.","authors":"Mohammed Aboelkhier, Mohamed Ghazy, Walid A Al-Zordk","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10948","DOIUrl":"10.11607/jomi.10948","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effect of titanium base height on torque loss of monolithic zirconia, lithium disilicate, and polymer-infiltrated ceramic hybrid abutment restorations for an offset placed implant.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 42 hybrid abutment restorations supported by offset implant placement (4.2-mm diameter, 10-mm length) were divided into six groups: short titanium base and zirconia (SZ), long titanium base and zirconia (LZ), short titanium base and lithium disilicate (SE), long titanium base and lithium disilicate (LE), short titanium base and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (SP), and long titanium base and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (LP). An adhesive resin cement was used to bond the restoration to the titanium base. The restoration was secured with a titanium screw, tightened to 30 Ncm using a calibrated torque meter device. The specimens were exposed to thermocycling (5,000 cycles at 5°C to 55°C), then cyclic loading (120,000 cycles, 50 N, 1.6 Hz), where the load was placed vertically in the mesial fossa of the restoration. The loosening torque value of the abutment screw was measured by the torque meter device, and then the torque loss and its percentage were calculated. Two-way and one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical data analysis (α = .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two-way ANOVA showed significant differences in loosening torque, torque loss, and percentage of torque loss across the restorative material (P < .001), with no significant difference across the height of the titanium base (P = .213) and no significant interaction (P = .845) between the restorative material and titanium base height. Regarding the restoration type, one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference (F ratio = 15.95, P < .001) in torque loss between groups. The mean torque loss was significantly higher for monolithic zirconia than for lithium disilicate (P = .039) and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (P < .001). A significant difference (P = .013) was also found between the lithium disilicate and polymer-infiltrated ceramic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The restorative material had a major effect on the torque maintenance in hybrid abutment restorations supported by offset implant placement, while the titanium base abutment height had no influence on torque maintenance. Compared to lithium disilicate and polymer-infiltrated ceramic materials, monolithic zirconia induced higher torque loss when used as a hybrid abutment restoration.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"110-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141877111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Morphometric Comparison of Two Implants with Different Macrogeometries Placed Immediately in the Anterior Maxilla-A Randomized Clinical Trial with up to 6 Months of Follow-up.","authors":"Laura Silva, Francisco Correia, António Felino, Ana Cristina Braga, Ricardo Faria-Almeida","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10943","DOIUrl":"10.11607/jomi.10943","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the morphometric results of immediate implants with a cylindrical (conventional) or triangular neck placed in Type 1C sockets in the anterior maxilla, with 6 months of osseointegration.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective randomized clinical trial comprised 20 individuals randomly assigned to each group (10 triangular-neck implants and 10 cylindrical-neck implants). Consecutively, direct measurements were performed: before (T-1) and after (T0) tooth extraction, after implant placement (T1), after 1 month of submerged implant healing (T2), when placing the healing abutment (T3), after placing the definitive crown (T3c), and after 6 months of osseointegration (T4).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant difference in the buccal cortical thickness was identified between T1 and T3 (0.49 ± 0.86 mm). Although there was a significant increase in the buccal cortical thickness in both implants, this increase was greater for the triangularneck implants (0.08 ± 0.59 mm for cylindrical vs 0.90 ± 0.91 mm for triangular). It was also observed that implants placed below the buccal bone crest (≤ -1 mm) promote less vertical buccal bone loss than implants placed ≥ -1 mm, at crest level (-0.65 ± 0.52 mm vs -1.42 ± 0.86 mm, respectively). This observation needs to be further investigated in additional studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The triangular-neck implants showed an increase in the cortical buccal thickness compared to the cylindrical implants. However, this increase does not fully compensate the remodeling after tooth loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"99-109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141094781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effect of Primary Stability on Short vs. Conventional -Implants with Reverse Concave Neck.","authors":"Daniel Greenberg, Nathan Estrin, Rafael Delgado-Ruiz, Georgios E Romanos","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11263","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vertical ridge augmentation has less long-term predictability than horizontal ridge augmentation due to common complications with vertical Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), including early exposure of the barrier membrane and decreased bone stability.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the primary stability of short implants versus conventional implants, in vitro.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two groups of implants with reverse concave neck and neck micro threads (ULT, Ditron Dental, CA) were studied; short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) and conventional implant (Ø 3.75mm x 10mm). A total of 80 implants were placed by the same calibrated clinician at 800RPM, 40 short implants and 40 conventional implants. Each implant was placed in dense (type II) and soft (type IV) bone. Implant primary stability was recorded using insertion torque (IT), Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA), and Periotest values. Statistical comparison with Analysis of Variance were completed to compare differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The comparison of IT, RFA and Periotest of the two groups of implants showed statistical significance (P<0.0001) favoring the short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) in both the soft and dense bone qualities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of this study, short implants with wide diameter seem to have a higher level of implant stability compared to narrow implants with conventional length.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143071331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Thermal Changes During Digital Guided Implant Surgery Using the Conventional and Single Drill Protocols.","authors":"Aritza Brizuela-Velasco, Daniel Robles, Saray Fernández-Hernández, José Manuel Mendes, Ignacio Sanz, Javier Gil","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11066","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare heat generation during osteotomy for dental implant placement using conventional (sequential drilling) and single drill protocol in digitally guided surgery and to clarify differences in thermal exposure time.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this study, we used a bovine rib ex vivo model with a surgical splint and a type K thermocouple to measure temperature and time. The conventional protocol (n=20) involved sequential drilling using 6 drills of increasing diameter, while the simplified protocol used a single drill (n=20). On the other hand, four implant beds were prepared in the tibia of a New Zealand rabbit to compare the mean temperature values between the in vivo and ex vivo models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Student's t-test revealed no significant differences (p=0.1688) in temperature elevation between the conventional drilling (mean, 1.977°C; sd 1.165) and single drilling (mean, 2.634°C; sd 1.734) protocols. However, significant differences between the groups were found in the exposure time: 107.105 seconds (sd 29.196) and 16.842 (sd 8.101) respectively. The mean temperature increase due to drilling was 0.365°C (sd 0.204) and 0.378°C (sd 0.381) in the rabbit tibia and bovine rib, respectively, with no significant differences (p-value = 0.926) between the in vivo and ex vivo models.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Conventional and single drill guided surgery protocols for implant bed preparation generate similar temperatures in vitro. Exposure time is longer with conventional protocols than with single drill protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143071179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration: L-PRF Bone-Block Vs A Mixture of Autogenous Bone with Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral. A Split-Mouth RCT Study with 25 Months Follow-Up.","authors":"Rutger A L Dhondt, Marc Quirynen, Pierre Lahoud, Simone Cortellini, Andy Temmerman","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11095","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to assess the differences between a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block and a combination of 50% autogenous bone (AB) and 50% deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) as grafting material for horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized double-blind split-mouth clinical trial included 13 subjects requiring bilateral horizontal bone augmentation. Each patient received both treatment modalities: one side of the jaw was treated by GBR with the L-PRF and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block, and the other side with a 50/50 mixture of AB and DBBM. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate horizontal bone width (HBW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at various time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-augmentation (T1), at implant placement (T2), and one year after abutment connection (T4). Bone sounding (BS) was also used to verify CBCT measurements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found in HBW gain between test (L-PRF) and control (AB/DBBM) sites at any timepoint. Both sites showed significant HBW loss post-implant placement, with more bone volume lost at higher crestal levels (Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4). At the Sh2 level, 48.8% of the HBW gain at T1 was lost by T4 in test sites, and 46.2% in control sites. Similarly, BBT at Sh2 reduced from 4.7 ± 1.0 mm to 1.3 ± 1.5 mm in test sites and from 2.1 ± 1.0 mm to 0.9 ± 0.8 mm in control sites. Both groups of sites had one complication, resulting in a 91.6% success rate for both treatments. The cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% at 16 months, with a mean interproximal bone level (IBL) loss of 0.2 ± 0.9 mm and 0.1 ± 0.6 mm for test and control sites, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found between the AB/DBBM composite graft and the L-PRF and bovine bone mineral block for horizontal GBR. Significant resorption of grafted volume occurs within 25 months, continuing post-implant placement. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings and optimize GBR techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143070805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Qualitative Analysis of Implant-Bone Interface After Implant Placement Implementing Condensation Technique In Vitro.","authors":"Yuriy Garaev, Nina K Anderson, Rafael Delgado-Ruiz, Georgios E Romanos","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11080","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11080","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The release of titanium nanoparticles during implant placement in dense bone is a significant concern, as it can potentially have adverse effects on the peri-implant tissues and an impact on the etiology of peri-implant diseases. The objective of this study was to examine the presence of titanium nanoparticles at the bone-implant interface during implant placement utilizing the bone condensation technique in vitro. Artificial Type IV bone slices (4mm thick) were securely held in place with a vice. Two groups of implants were placed. One group (test group) was placed under the condensation technique using cylindrical osteotomes. The other group (control group) was placed following the traditional surgical protocol. Implants were placed in parallel between bone slices held in a vice. Three groups of implant designs (6 implants in each group) were inserted into the bone. Two implant designs consisted of implants made of pure titanium (grade 4), while the third implant design group was constructed of titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V). Subsequently, the blocks were separated, and the peri-implant bone interface was qualitatively evaluated for titanium presence using X-ray-fluorescence spectrometry (XFS) at the coronal, middle, and apical thirds of osteotomies (n=12/ implant system). Descriptive statistical analysis showing the mean values (&#43;/-SD) of titanium nanoparticles was performed. No detectable titanium levels were identified in the control group of titanium alloy-implants compared to pure titanium-implants. In contrast, the test group of all implant systems showed presence of titanium nanoparticles in coronal, middle, and apical thirds. Our results indicate that bone condensation technique is associated with titanium release during implant placement in vitro. These findings were shown for both pure titanium- and titanium alloy-dental implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143071171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Influence of Dental Implant Diameters on Prosthesis Complications: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Yu-Ting Yeh, Lan-Lin Chiou, Hsuan-Hung Chen, Guo- Hao Lin, Richard T Kao, Donald A Curtis","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10964","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to analyze the risk of prosthesis complications across different implant diameters.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An electronic search across PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until December 2023 was performed. Studies comparing implant prosthesis complications among extra-narrow (<3.0 mm), narrow (≥3.0 to <3.75 mm), standard (≥3.75 to <5 mm), and wide-diameter (≥5 mm) implants were included. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the risk ratio of prosthesis complications across different diameters, particularly in non-full arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (ISFDP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen clinical studies were included. In non-full arch ISFDP, the most prevalent complication was screw loosening in narrow, standard, and wide-diameter implants (17.28%, 4.08% and 12.45%, respectively), and decementation (3.4%) in extra-narrow diameter implants. In implant overdentures, extra-narrow, narrow and standard-diameter implants demonstrated high rates of retentive cap wear (58.33%, 80.49% and 70%, respectively), whereas wide-diameter implants had 16.67% overdenture repair. The meta-analyses showed a risk ratio of 0.20 (95% confidence interval= 0.04 to 0.94, p= 0.04) and 0.17 (95% CI= 0.06 to 0.45, p< 0.0004) for abutment fracture in single crowns and ISFDP comparing narrow versus standard-diameter implants. No significant differences in risk ratios were observed for screw loosening, decementation, porcelain chipping, fracture, or screw fracture among the different diameter groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review highlights that screw loosening and retentive cap wear are the most common prosthesis complications in ISFDP and overdentures, regardless of implant diameter. While narrow-diameter implants have a lower risk of abutment fracture compared to standard-diameter implants, clinicians should carefully consider patient characteristics, implant locations, and abutment features when selecting the ideal implant diameter.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143071167","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Single-Unit Implant- Supported Restorations: A 12-Month Cross-Sectional Clinical Study.","authors":"Nur Pektaş, Özer İşisağ","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11233","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This retrospective clinical study aims to analyze single-unit implant-supported restorations' clinical and radiographic outcomes comprehensively.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this retrospective study, patients who had undergone 12 months of implant-supported singleunit fixed prosthetic treatment were scanned from the archives, and a hundred patients were included in the study. Implant success and survival rates were assessed according to the consensus decisions published at the International Oral Implantology Congress in 2007. Prosthetic complications such as chipping, screw loosening, and decementation were also evaluated. In addition, success/survival rates and prosthetic compositions were associated with some surgical and prosthetic parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to the success/survival criteria, 88% of the implants were successful, 10% had satisfactory survival, and 2% had compromised survival. The risk of satisfactory or compromised survival was 62.5 times higher in individuals with inadequately keratinized mucosa compared to those with adequately keratinized mucosa (p < 0.001). It was also 5.736 times greater for extractions due to periodontal disease versus endodontic reasons (p = 0.010) and 4.629 times higher for implants with diameters less than 3.75 mm compared to those between 3.75 mm and 5 mm (p = 0.037). Screw loosening was observed in 15% of the evaluated restorations, decementation in 13% and chipping in 4%, and the risk of screw loosening was 4.444 times higher for screw retention abutments compared to standard abutments (p=0.015).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Insufficient keratinized mucosa, periodontal problems leading to tooth extractions, and the use of narrowdiameter implants can negatively affect the success of implant procedures. Loosening in screw-retained restorations is due solely to screw loosening, which is a high risk for screwretained restorations. Loosening in cement-retained restorations, on the other hand, is caused by the decementation of the prosthetic restoration or loosening of the abutment screw supporting the restoration.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143019195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}