A 5-year prospective clinical study of Neobiotech implants for partially edentulous patients

Labriaga, Wilmart; Hong, Jianxun; Park, Jin-Hong; Shin, Sang‐Wan; Lee, Jeong-Yol

doi:10.4047/jkap.2017.55.3.272

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Certain systemic factors influence the body's ability to heal, including the local inflammatory reaction. In this observational study, we obtained a non-osseointegration rate of dental implants of 2.71%, a percentage close to that obtained by Derks et [6,[25][26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis of 7 Years of Experience

Grigoras,

Cosarca,

Ormenișan

2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The use of dental implant rehabilitation in the treatment of complete and partial edentulism has become an integral treatment today. This treatment is performed on healthy patients, but in some situations, also on those with associated general ailments. The presence of associated conditions increases the degree of difficulty of this type of treatment and tests the doctor’s ability to manage the clinical case. The purpose of the study was to perform a meta-analysis of dental implants inserted over seven years and evaluate early implant failure in correspondence with age, sex, region of insertion, type of implant, and general state of health. Methods: A retrospective study was performed over 7 years of experience. For the study, 213 patients who fit the established inclusion criteria were selected. Patients were grouped taking into account age, sex, the type of implant used, and general associated conditions. The collected data were analyzed using IBM SPSS STATISTICS 25.0 for windows Results: There were no highlighted situations in which the rejection of the dental implant occurred 10 days postoperatively or later during the healing period. Conclusions: Our results confirm and strengthen the existing data in the specialized literature, especially those related to the loss of implants in patients with associated general diseases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis of 7 Years of Experience

Grigoras,

Cosarca,

Ormenișan

2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prevalence of early failure in the present study was within the previously reported range at the implant level (1.3%–6.36%) [672324]. However, it should be noted that the rates can vary with the cutoff time point used to divide the early and late phases.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Early implant failure: a retrospective analysis of contributing factors

Kang

Kim

Lee

et al. 2019

J Periodontal Implant Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the prevalence of early implant failure using a single implant system and to identify the factors contributing to early implant failure. Methods: Patients who received implant treatment with a single implant system (Luna ® , Shinhung, Seoul, Korea) at Dankook University Dental Hospital from 2015 to 2017 were enrolled. The following data were collected for analysis: sex and age of the patient, seniority of the surgeon, diameter and length of the implant, position in the dental arch, access approach for sinus-floor elevation, and type of guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure. The effect of each predictor was evaluated using the crude hazard ratio and the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) in univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, respectively. Results: This study analyzed 1,031 implants in 409 patients, who comprised 169 females and 240 males with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range [IQR], 47-61 years) and were followed up for a median of 7.2 months (IQR, 5.6-9.9 months) after implant placement. Thirty-five implants were removed prior to final prosthesis delivery, and the cumulative survival rate in the early phase at the implant level was 95.6%. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that seniority of the surgeon (residents: aHR=2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-5.94) and the jaw in which the implant was placed (mandible: aHR=2.31; 95% CI, 1.12-4.76) exerted statistically significant effects on early implant failure after adjusting for sex, age, dimensions of the implant, and type of GBR procedure (preoperative and/or simultaneous) (P<0.05). Conclusions: Prospective studies are warranted to further elucidate the factors contributing to early implant failure. In the meantime, surgeons should receive appropriate training and carefully select the bone bed in order to minimize the risk of early implant failure.

show abstract

“…This study was focused on implant failure only in the early phase of healing (within the first year) in which literature report higher incidence of failures than the late phase [12,13] and evaluated both patient and implant level variables. The prevalence of early failure observed in this study (1.7%) is within the range already reported in the literature (0.7-6.3%) [7,14,15]. In the present study, we included only patients treated with the same implant system and same rehabilitation with screwed fixed full-arch prostheses.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Risk factors for early implant failure: a retrospective-multicentric study of 2323 implants in screw retained fixed full arch rehabilitation

Di Lorenzo,

Torsani,

Tonveronachi

et al. 2023

J Oral Med Oral Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate possible risk factors for early implant failure in screw retained fixed full-arch rehabilitation. Methods: data of 487 patients (2323 implants) treated with full-arch rehabilitation supported by same implants brand were collected for the time period from 2017 to 2020 and examined to evaluate early implants failure rates. The following data were collected for statistical analysis: sex, age, health disorders (diabetes and hypertension) and bad habit (smoke) of the patient, location of the implant (maxilla or mandible, anterior or posterior site), type of implant's healing and bone regeneration procedures. Chi-squared test, bivariate comparison analysis and univariate mixed model analysis were used to estimate the effect of both patient-related and implant related variables on early implant failure as a potential risk factors. Results: 487 patients were included, 218 females (62.3 ± 9.14 of age) and 269 males (62.8 ± 10.11 of age) in 30 private institutions for a total of 2323 implants placed and a total of 526 screw retained fixed full arch rehabilitation. A total of 40 out of 2323 (1.7%) implants failed prematurely within 1 year, 32 in the maxilla 8 in the mandible. Bivariate comparison analysis and univariate mixed model analysis showed that female patient, implant placed in maxilla, age <61 years and submerged healed implants showed a statistically significant higher failure rate among the risk factors considered. Conclusions: Implants placed in the upper jaw and their modality of healing seems to be associated with a higher risk of early implant failure.

show abstract

A 5-year prospective clinical study of Neobiotech implants for partially edentulous patients

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis of 7 Years of Experience

Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis of 7 Years of Experience

Early implant failure: a retrospective analysis of contributing factors

Risk factors for early implant failure: a retrospective-multicentric study of 2323 implants in screw retained fixed full arch rehabilitation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About