Diagnosis of implant stability and its impact on implant survival: a prospective case series study

Rodrigo, Daniel; Aracil, Luis; Martín, Conchita; Sanz, Mariano

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01820.x

Cited by 111 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several authors have suggested that primary stability may be a useful predictor for osseointegration [29][30][31][32][33][34][35] and that a high primary stability makes immediate loading more predictable [19,20,26,27] [32]. In fact, in that study, no implant with ISQ > 60 failed, while 19% of implants with ISQ < 60 failed [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…In fact, in that study, no implant with ISQ > 60 failed, while 19% of implants with ISQ < 60 failed [32]. Pagliani and collaborators further proved that the correlation between micromobility of implants and ISQ is nonlinear and micromotion is reduced by approximately 50% from 60 to 70 ISQ [33], while Turkyilmaz et al found a positive strong correlation between bone density (calculated with computed tomography) and IT/ISQ insertion torque, as well as a positive correlation between IT and ISQ [34].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the primary stability is such an important element and can determine the success or failure of implant therapy, many authors have studied it [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][30][31][32][33][34][35]. Primary implant stability can be evaluated at baseline either through IT registration or through ISQ assessment [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][30][31][32][33][34][35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Primary implant stability can be evaluated at baseline either through IT registration or through ISQ assessment [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][30][31][32][33][34][35]. Maximum torque of the implant placement provides the rotational stability of the implant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Gomes¹

2017

http://isrctn.com/

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. To evaluate the primary and secondary stability of implants in the posterior maxilla. Methods. Patients were allocated into three groups: (A) native bone, (B) partially regenerated bone, and (C) nearly totally regenerated bone. Insertion torque (IT) and implant stability quotient (ISQ) were measured at placement, to evaluate whether satisfactory high primary stability (IT ≥ 45 N/cm; ISQ ≥ 60) was achieved; ISQ was measured 15, 30, 45, and 60 days after placement, to investigate the evolution to secondary stability. Results. 133 implants (Anyridge5, Megagen) were installed in 59 patients: 55 fixtures were placed in Group A, 57 in Group B, and 21 in Group C. Fifty-two implants had satisfactory high primary stability (IT ≥ 45 N/cm; ISQ ≥ 60). A positive correlation was found between all variables (IT, ISQ at t = 0, t = 60), and statistically higher IT and ISQ values were found for implants with satisfactory high primary stability. Significant differences were found for IT and ISQ between the groups (A, B, and C); however, no drops were reported in the median ISQ values during the healing period. Conclusions. The evaluation of the primary and secondary implant stability may contribute to higher implant survival/success rates in critical areas, such as the regenerated posterior maxilla. The present study is registered in the ISRCTN registry with ID ISRCTN33469250.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Gomes¹

2017

http://isrctn.com/

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, diabetes has been significantly correlated with implant failure. 18 Rodrigo et al 25 reported that resonance frequency analysis (RFA) values at restoration placement could significantly predict the outcomes of implants. Quirynen et al 26 reported that a large proportion of failing implants may be explained by the lack of proper supportive periodontal therapy (SPT), and Ong et al 27 proposed that the irregularity of SPT might influence the outcomes and differences between studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting the survival of implants: a long-term retrospective study

Song

Lee

et al. 2015

J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term survival of implants retrospectively and determine the risk factors associated with implant failure. Materials and Methods: Of all implants that were placed at the Department of Periodontology of the Dental Hospital of Gangneung-Wonju National University from January 1998 to December 2012, 2265 implants that were followed up until June 2013 were included in this study. Data were collected from clinical and radiographic examinations from previous visits. The information gathered included gender, age, smoking status, implant diameter, implant length, surface of implant, location of implant within the dental arch, surgical techniques and existence of complications. Results: The survival rate before loading was 98.9%. The cumulative survival rate after 5 years of loading was 97.2%, and after 15 years of loading was 95.2%. In a simple logistic regression analysis, gender (P = 0.016), smoking status (P = 0.001), location of implant (P = 0.020) and existence of complications (P = 0.002) were statistically associated with implant failure and included in the multiple regression analysis. As a result of multiple logistic regression analysis, the variables statistically associated with implant failure (P < 0.05) were smoking status (P = 0.049) and existence of complications (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The cumulative survival rate of dental implants after 15 years of loading was 95.2% and that the variables statistically associated with implant failure were smoking status and existence of complications. (J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2015;31(1):10-9)

show abstract

Sinus Site Preparation

2016

Clinical Cases in Implant Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnosis of implant stability and its impact on implant survival: a prospective case series study

Abstract: Only secondary stability RFA values were able to significantly predict implant outcomes, but not primary stability values. There was a good correlation between RFA and the proposed clinical classification of primary stability.

Cited by 111 publications

References 49 publications

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Factors affecting the survival of implants: a long-term retrospective study

Sinus Site Preparation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About