대한치과의사협회지 (The Journal of the Korean dental association)

  • 제47권9호
  • /
  • Pages.585-595
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 0376-4672(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-7961(eISSN)
대한치과의사협회 (The Korean Dental Association)
권호 표지

임프란트 수술 및 보철물에 따른 합병증 연구

Study about the complications associated with implant surgery and prosthetic treatment

  • 이지영 (분당서울대학교병원 치과 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 김영균 (분당서울대학교병원 치과 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 윤필영 (분당서울대학교병원 치과 구강악안면외과) ;
  • 배지현 (분당서울대학교병원 치과 치과보존과) ;
  • 김재승 (건국대학교병원 치과 구강악안면외과)
  • Lee, Ji-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Young-Kyun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Yun, Pil-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Bae, Ji-Hyun (Department of Conservative Dentistry Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Jae-Seung (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Konkuk University Medical Center)
  • 발행 : 2009.09.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose : The aim of this study was to compare surgical complications between simple implant placement and implant placement combined with complicated surgical procedures. We also evaluated prosthetic complications according to the specific types of prosthesis. Material and Method : A retrospective analysis of dental chart of patients who was performed implant therapy during the period from June 2003 to December 2005 was carried out. This study was performed on 408 patients (208 male, 200 female). In addition, 1671 implants were performed. Based on their medical record and radiographs, the authors evaluated surgical and prosthetic complications, surgical procedures accompanied at the time of implant, risk factors of implant failure etc. Result : Surgical complications were developed on 358 implants(21.4% on total placed implants) and wound dehiscence was most prevalent complication. On maxillary posterior area, surgical complications developed more frequently on implants with major surgery and showed a significant difference. And complication rate of implants accompanied with GBR was higher than that of simple implants placement and also showed significant difference. The implant supported prosthesis showed no statistical difference in the occurrence of complications according to the types of prosthesis, and food retention was the most common post-prosthetic complication. Also we speculated that length and width of implant showed significant correlation to the failure of implant primary osseointegration. Conclusion : Based on the result, clinician should provide more careful maintenance for patients with implant placement accompanied by complicated surgical procedure. And periodic maintenance for the patient is requested for long-term survival of implant therapy.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Kim YK. Clinical study on early failure of dental implant. J Korean Dental Association. 2006; 44(11)：647-657.
  2. Kreissl ME, Gerds T, Muche R et al. Technical complications of implant-supported fixed partial dentures in partially edentulous cases after an average observation period of 5 years. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2007; 18：720-726. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01414.x
  3. Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Consensus report：Towards optimized treatment outcomes for dental implants, Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:389-405.
  4. Park JW, Kim SG, Kim YK, Choi DJ. Techniques of maxillary sinus bone graft. Seoul：Meyung-mun Pub co., 2009; 161-212.
  5. Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E et al. The prevalence of surgical complications of sinus graft procedure and their implant on implant survival, J Periodontol 2004;75(4):511-516. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2004.75.4.511
  6. Kim YK . Risk factor in implant dentistry. Seoul：Well pub, 2006; 173-189.
  7. Kim SG, Kim YK, Horiuchi K, Mitsugi M. Implant placement for compromised bone. Seoul：Daehan pub, 2006; 106-109.
  8. Scurria MS, Morgan ZV 4th, Guckes AD et al. Prognostic variables associated with implant failure：A retrospective study, Int J Oral Maxillofac implants 1998;13:400-406.
  9. Hass R. Survival of 1920 IMZ implants followed for up to 100 month, Int J oral Maxillofac implant 1996;11(5):581-588.
  10. Watanabe F, Tawada Y, Komatsu S et al. Heat distribution in bone during preparation of implant ：Heat Analysis by realtime thermography, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7(2):212-219.
  11. Bartling R, Freeman K, Richard A et al. The incidence of altered sensation of the mental nerve after mandibular implant placement, J Oral Maxillofac surg 1999; 57(1):1408-1412. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(99)90720-6
  12. Jensen OT, Greer RO Jr, Johnson L et al. Vertical Guided bone graft augmentation in an new canine mandibular model, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:335-342.
  13. Kassolis JD, Bowers GM. Supracrestal bone regeneration：A Pilot study, Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1999;19:131-137.
  14. Urban I. Horizontal augmentation for dental implant site development with GBR technique utilizing resorbable membrane and particulated autograft, Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17(4):115-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.1273.x
  15. Iasella JM, Greenwell H, Miller RL et al. Ridge preservation with freeze-dried bone allo-graft and a collagen membrane compared to extraction alone for implant site development：a clinical and histologic study in humans, J Periodontol 2003;74(7):990-999. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2003.74.7.990
  16. Kim BO. Implant treatment and guided bony regeneration, J Korean Dental Association 2001;39:819-823.
  17. Kim YK, Yun PY. Implant installation after guided bone regeneration：Comparison between immediate and delayed group, J Korean Dental Association 1999;42:328-332.
  18. Kim CH, Jung WH. A clinical study on complication of implant prosthetics, Oral Bio Res 2000;24(1):181-187.
  19. Hutton JE, Heath MR, Chai JY et al. Factors related to success and failure rates at 3-year follow-up in a multicenter study of overdenture supported by Branemark implant, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:33-42.
  20. Degidi M, Piattelli A, Carinci F. Clinical outcome of narrow diameter implants：A retrospective study of 510 implants, J Periodontol 2008;79:49-54. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2008.070248
  21. Ivanoff CJ, Gr-ndahl K, Sennerby L et al. Influence of variations in implant diameters：A 3 to 5 year retrospective clinical report, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:173-180.