Estimating the Importance of Significant Risk Factors for Early Dental Implant Failure: A Monte Carlo Simulation

Buhara, Oğuz; Pehlivan, Salahi

doi:10.11607/jomi.5802

Cited by 25 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…4,11 Due to the own traits of each case in clinical work of implantology, it was considered that a multifactorial etiology would lead to implant loss. 12 As for participant variables, including gender and age, a higher failure risk was discovered in males than in females, which was in accordance with previous findings. 5,6 In contrary, no significant difference of survival rates was detected between groups classified with age in our study, suggesting that age was not able to be a latent risk factor for implant loss.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The implant loss rate in this retrospective study was 2.11% and lower than other previous studies with longer follow‐up period . Due to the own traits of each case in clinical work of implantology, it was considered that a multifactorial etiology would lead to implant loss . As for participant variables, including gender and age, a higher failure risk was discovered in males than in females, which was in accordance with previous findings .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of implant loss risk factors especially in maxillary molar location: A retrospective study of 6977 implants in Chinese individuals

Zhou

Dong

Zhu

et al. 2018

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The knowledge of the potential risk factors associated with implant loss is crucial for dental clinicians, but the opinions about the risk factors are still diverse and controversial. Purpose This retrospective study assessed the risk factors associated with implant loss, especially that in the maxillary molar location. Materials and Methods From January 2015 to March 2017, 4338 Chinese patients received 6977 implants at Nanjing Stomatological Hospital. Information on patient age, gender, bone grafting procedure, implant location, length and diameter, and the records of lost implants were obtained. The Kaplan‐Meier method and log‐rank test were used to conduct a survival function analysis. Chi‐square test and multivariate Cox regression analysis were used to identify risk factors related to implant loss. Results The cumulative survival rate (CSR) after 0‐32 months of observation period for all implants was 97.76%, and the CSR for maxillary molar implants was 97.00%. Maxillary molar implants showed a significantly lower CSR than the other implants (P < .05). Male sex, short implants (<10 mm) were considered as risk factors for implant loss. However, male sex and bone grafting procedure were regarded as risk factors for maxillary molar implant loss, which was slightly different from the result of all implants. Conclusions Male sex, short implants (<10 mm) and maxillary molar location were considered as potential risk factors for implant loss, whereas male sex and bone grafting procedure were significantly associated with implant loss in maxillary molar location.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Analysis of implant loss risk factors especially in maxillary molar location: A retrospective study of 6977 implants in Chinese individuals

Zhou

Dong

Zhu

et al. 2018

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17 The highest risk for implant failure was associated with periodontitis followed by tobacco smoking. 25 It has been proven in literature that tobacco smoking is a risk factor in periodontitis and that it affects healing. A few studies have shown that the overall mean failure rate of dental implants in smokers is approximately twice that in nonsmokers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Dental Implants in a Saudi Population

Al-Safadi

et al. 2019

ijetst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The primary aim of this study was to detect the prevalence of dental implants in a Saudi population in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The secondary objective was to describe the status of the health insurance covering dental implants in Saudi Arabia. Materials and Methods: 1831 Saudi patients aged ≥18 years with at least one missing permanent tooth and residing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia were randomly selected and clinically examined for implant prostheses types (single-tooth implant, implant-supported long or short span conventional fixed bridge, implant over denture). Radiographs were used too. The health insurance covering dental implants was detected. The data obtained including age, gender, systemic disease, and tobacco smoking were documented in a patient examination form then statistically analyzed using Chi-Square Test or Fisher-Freeman-Halton Test and U-Test. Results: The prevalence of dental implants among adults missing at least one tooth was 12.7%. Of those 12.7%, the majority of patients had 2-4 implants (5.4%). The majority of patients who had one implant were in the age group <40 years; patients who had >8 implants were seen in the age group ≥60. In addition, the prevalence of implant prostheses types was as the following: Single-tooth implant 75.5%, followed by implant-supported short span fixed bridge 17.1%, implant over denture 3.9%, and implant-supported long span fixed bridge 3.5%. The majority of patients treated with single-tooth implant were in the age group <40 years. There was an insignificant difference in the median number of dental implants between males and females p>0.05. Conclusion: The majority of patients were treated with single-tooth implant. Health insurance policy doesn’t cover the cost of dental implants in Saudi Arabia. Keywords: Implant, Prevalence, Prostheses/Prosthesis, Type, Patient

show abstract

“… 19 , 20 EDIF is thought to usually be caused by factors such as inappropriate surgical and prosthetic protocols, surgical complications, low bone volume or quality at the recipient site, or habits (smoking and parafunctions) that, along with systemic conditions, can jeopardize osseointegration. 21 , 22 In particular, early failures due to lack of osseointegration are among the worst problems in modern implantology. They appear to be difficult to resolve and, since they seem to occur in particular categories of patients, they might be related to the patient's systemic health condition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low serum vitamin D and early dental implant failure: Is there a connection? A retrospective clinical study on 1740 implants placed in 885 patients

Mangano¹,

Oskouei

Paz

et al. 2018

J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Since osseointegration depends on bone metabolism, low levels of vitamin D in the blood may negatively affect bone formation around dental implants. To date, only a few studies have investigated the possible connection between serum levels of vitamin D and early dental implant failure (EDIF), i.e. failure that occurs within 4 months after placement, before the connection of the prosthetic abutment. The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is a relationship between low serum levels of vitamin D and EDIF. Methods. Data used for this retrospective study were derived from the records of a private dental clinic. Inclusion criteria were patients who had been treated with dental implants, inserted with a submerged technique from January 2003 to December 2017. EDIF was the outcome of this study. Chi-squared test was used to investigate the effect of patient-related variables (age, gender, smoking habit, history of periodontal disease and serum levels of vitamin D) on EDIF. Results. Originally, 885 patients treated with 1,740 fixtures were enrolled in this study. Overall, 35 EDIFs (3.9%) were reported. No correlation was found between EDIF and the patients' gender (P=0.998), age (P=0.832), smoking habit (P=0.473) or history of periodontal disease (P=0.386). Three EDIFs (11.1%) were reported in 27 patients with serum levels of vitamin D <10 ng/mL, 20 EDIFs (4.4%) in 448 patients with levels between 10 and 30 ng/mL, and 12 EDIFs (2.9%) in 410 patients with levels >30 ng/mL. Although there was a clear trend toward an increased incidence of EDIF with lowering of serum vitamin D levels, no statistically significant difference (P=0.105) was found among these three groups. Conclusion. Within its limitations (retrospective design, low number of patients with severe blood levels of vitamin D enrolled), this study failed to demonstrate a significant relationship between low serum levels of vitamin D and increased risk of EDIF. However, since a dramatic increase in EDIFs with lowering of vitamin D levels in the blood has been reported, further clinical studies with appropriate design (prospective or randomized controlled studies on a larger sample of severely deficient patients) are needed to better investigate this topic

show abstract

Estimating the Importance of Significant Risk Factors for Early Dental Implant Failure: A Monte Carlo Simulation

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

Analysis of implant loss risk factors especially in maxillary molar location: A retrospective study of 6977 implants in Chinese individuals

Analysis of implant loss risk factors especially in maxillary molar location: A retrospective study of 6977 implants in Chinese individuals

Prevalence of Dental Implants in a Saudi Population

Low serum vitamin D and early dental implant failure: Is there a connection? A retrospective clinical study on 1740 implants placed in 885 patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About