An open, prospective, non‐randomized, controlled, multicentre study to evaluate the clinical outcome of implant treatment in women over 60 years of age with osteoporosis/osteopenia: 1‐year results

Temmerman, Andy; Rasmusson, Lars; Kübler, Alexander C.; Thor, Andreas; Quirynen, Marc

doi:10.1111/clr.12766

Cited by 41 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although data from available literature suggests that osteoporosis is not an absolute contraindication to oral and orthopaedic implant placement [10, 11], there is certain evidence that this disorder may increase the rate of implant failure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of magnesium on early osseointegration in osteoporotic bone: a histological and gene expression investigation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryMagnesium has a key role in osteoporosis and could enhance implant osseointegration in osteoporotic patients. Titanium implants impregnated with Mg ions were installed in the tibia of ovariectomized rats. The release of Mg induced a significant increase of bone formation and the expression of anabolic markers in the peri-implant bone.IntroductionThe success of endosseous implants is highly predictable in patients possessing normal bone status, but it may be impaired in patients with osteoporosis. Thus, the application of strategies that adjuvate implant healing in compromized sites is of great interest. Magnesium has a key role in osteoporosis prevention and it is an interesting candidate for this purpose. In this study, the cellular and molecular effects of magnesium release from implants were investigated at the early healing stages of implant integration.MethodsOsteoporosis was induced in 24 female rats by means of ovariectomy and low-calcium diet. Titanium mini-screws were coated with mesoporous titania films and were loaded with magnesium (test group) or left as native (control group). The implants were inserted in the tibia and femur of the rats. One, 2 and 7 days after implantation, the implants were retrieved and histologically examined. In addition, expression of genes was evaluated in the peri-implant bone tissue at day 7 by means of quantitative polymerase chain reactions with pathway-oriented arrays.ResultsThe histological evaluation revealed that new bone formation started already during the first week of healing for both groups. However, around the test implants, new bone was significantly more abundant and spread along a larger surface of the implants. In addition, the release of magnesium induced a significantly higher expression of BMP6.ConclusionsThese results provide evidence that the release of magnesium promoted rapid bone formation and the activation of osteogenic signals in the vicinity of implants placed in osteoporotic bone.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00198-017-4004-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of magnesium on early osseointegration in osteoporotic bone: a histological and gene expression investigation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Bone Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…A more common disease affecting bones is osteoporosis. Generally speaking, there is no contraindication to apply dental implants in osteoporosis patients; the implant survival rate is comparable to that observed in healthy controls (Alqutaibi & Radi, ; Temmerman, Rasmusson, Kübler, Thor, & Quirynen, ; Wagner et al., ). However, the rate of peri‐implant bone loss might be slightly higher in osteoporosis patients, but this observation is in need of long‐term follow‐up.…”

Section: Bone Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 75%

The medically compromised patient: Are dental implants a feasible option?

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In healthy subjects, dental implants have evolved to be a common therapy to solve problems related to stability and retention of dentures as well as to replace failing teeth. Although dental implants are applied in medically compromised patients, it is often not well known whether this therapy is also feasible in these patients, whether the risk of implant failure and developing peri-implantitis is increased, and what specific preventive measures, if any, have to be taken when applying dental implants in these patients. Generally speaking, as was the conclusion by the leading review of Diz, Scully, and Sanz on placement of dental implants in medically compromised patients (J Dent, 41, 2013, 195), in a few disorders implant survival may be lower, and the risk of a compromised peri-implant health and its related complications be greater, but the degree of systemic disease control outweighs the nature of the disorder rather than the risk accompanying dental implant treatment. So, as dental implant treatment is accompanied by significant functional benefits and improved oral health-related quality of life, dental implant therapy is a feasible treatment in almost any medically compromised patient when the required preventive measures are taken and follow-up care is at a high level.

show abstract

“…One of the reasons for this lack of correlation is that increased bone density probably did not influence the increased contact between the implants and the bone, which may have made the correlation between the bone density and RFA and the bone level very weak 25 . In addition, it has been demonstrated that the peri-implant bone level was not influenced by bone density 26 . Moreover, it is possible that the low number of implants evaluated in this study and the short follow-up period may have influenced the absence of significant differences between short and conventional implants for the parameters that were evaluated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical comparison of short and conventional implants placed in the posterior region of the mandible. A pilot study

Ibelli

Assaf

Santos

et al. 2017

Rev. odontol. UNESP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical comparison of short and conventional implants placed in the posterior region of the mandible. A pilot study ResumoObjetivo: Avaliar e correlacionar os valores de densidade óssea radiográfica, altura óssea peri-implantar e de frequência de ressonância nos implantes curtos e convencionais instalados na região posterior da mandíbula após a instalação da prótese provisória. Material e método: Esse estudo piloto clínico prospectivo contou com a participação de 11 pacientes que foram divididos previamente em dois grupos: implantes curtos (n=18) (5,0 x 5,5 mm e 5,0 x 7,0 mm) e implantes convencionais (n=23) (4,0 x 10 mm e 4,0 x 11,5 mm). Foram executadas análise da frequência de ressonância, altura óssea e densidade óssea peri-implantar. Os implantes foram avaliados nos períodos T0 (imediatamente após a instalação do provisório), T1 (após 90 dias) e T2 (após 180 dias). Resultado: Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os grupos com relação a densidade óssea radiográfica (152,50 ± 15,39 vs. 157,60 ± 28,46, para implantes convencionais e curtos respectivamente no período T2), estabilidade dos implantes (Implantes convencionais: 66,76 ± 10,39 no período T0 e 61,85 ± 8,38 no período T2 vs. Implantes curtos: 57,50 ± 12,17 no período T0 e 61,53 ± 7,39 no período T2) e quanto a perda óssea periimplantar (0,03 mm vs. -0,17 mm, em implantes convencionais e curtos no período T2, respectivamente). Adicionalmente a isso, não foram detectados correlação significativa entre densidade radiográfica com altura óssea peri-implantar e nem com a frequência de ressonância. Conclusão: Verificou-se que os implantes curtos apresentaram um comportamento semelhante aos implantes de comprimento convencionais com relação à frequência de ressonância, a densidade radiográfica peri-implantar e a manutenção dos níveis ósseos periimplantares.Descritores: Reabsorção óssea; densidade óssea; próteses e implantes. AbstractObjective: To evaluate and correlate the values of radiographic bone density, peri-implant bone height and resonance frequency analysis (RFA) of short or conventional implants placed in the posterior region of the mandible after installing a prosthesis. Material and method: Eleven patients were selected for this prospective parallel pilot study. The prostheses were supported by two types of implants: short implants (n = 18) (5.0 x 5.5 mm and 5.0 x 7.0 mm) and conventional implants (n = 23) (4.0 x10 mm and 4.0 x 11.5 mm). The implants were evaluated by RFA, by measuring the bone height, and peri-implant bone density. The implants were evaluated at the periods T0 (immediately after installation of the prosthesis), T1 (after 90 days), and T2 (after 180 days). Result: There were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to radiographic bone density (152.50 ± 15.39 vs. 157.60 ± 28.46, for conventional and short implants, respectively at T2), stability of the implants (Conventional implants: 66.76 ± 10.39 at T0, and 61.85 ± 8.38 at T2 vs. Short implants: 57.50 ± 12.17 at T0, and 61.53 ± ...

show abstract

An open, prospective, non‐randomized, controlled, multicentre study to evaluate the clinical outcome of implant treatment in women over 60 years of age with osteoporosis/osteopenia: 1‐year results

Cited by 41 publications

References 52 publications

The effect of magnesium on early osseointegration in osteoporotic bone: a histological and gene expression investigation

The effect of magnesium on early osseointegration in osteoporotic bone: a histological and gene expression investigation

The medically compromised patient: Are dental implants a feasible option?

Clinical comparison of short and conventional implants placed in the posterior region of the mandible. A pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About