The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Retrospective study on survival and complication rates of posterior single implant according to the implant diameters, lengths and position

구치부 단일 임플란트의 직경과 길이, 식립 위치에 따른 생존율 및 합병증의 발생률에 대한 후향적 연구

  • Soo-Young Hong (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Seon-Ki Lee (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Jin-Han Lee (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Jae-In Lee (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Wonkwang University)
  • 홍수영 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 이선기 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 이진한 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 이재인 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2022.12.19
  • Accepted : 2023.02.17
  • Published : 2023.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose. This retrospective study was to investigate the survival and complication rates of posterior single implant according to the implant diameters, lengths and position. Materials and methods. Patients who had been restored single implant prosthesis in the posterior area by the three prosthodontists in the department of prosthodontics, Daejeon dental hospital of Wonkwang university, in the period from February 2014 to May 2018 were selected for the study. A total of 505 patients with 697 implants were observed. The survival and complications of implants were investigated using electronic medical records and radiographs. Fixture diameters, lengths, position, patient's sex and age were assessed as possible factor affecting the survival and complications of implants. Results. 3-year cumulative survival rates of posterior single implants were 98.5% and 5-year cumulative survival rates were 94.4%. 5-year cumulative survival rates were higher in implants with diameter > 4.0 mm (97.0%) than implants with diameter ≤ 4.0 mm (89.5%), and in females (98.8%) than males (92.4%). There were statistically significant differences (P < .05). The mechanical complication rate was 20.1% and the biological complication rate was 4.7%. Complications occurred in order of abutment screw loosening (7.5%), decementation (6.3%), proximal contact loss (3.7%) and so on. Abutment screw loosening occurred more frequently in the lower molar region (10.5%), in males (9.5%) than females (5.1%), and in patients aged < 65 years (9.4%) than patients aged ≥ 65 years (5.1%). There were statistically significant differences (P < .05). Conclusion. The 5-year cumulative survival rates were higher in implants with diameter > 4.0 mm than implants with diameter ≤ 4.0 mm and in females than males. Abutment screw loosening which was the most commonly occurring complication occurred more frequently in the lower molar region, in males than females, and in patients aged < 65 years than patients aged ≥ 65 years. There were statistically significant differences.

목적: 구치부 단일 임플란트에서 임플란트의 직경과 길이, 식립 위치에 따른 생존율 및 각각의 합병증의 발생률을 후향적으로 조사하는 것이다. 대상 및 방법: 본 연구는 2014년 2월부터 2018년 5월까지 원광대학교 대전치과병원 보철과에서 3명의 보철전문의에게 구치부 단일 치관으로 임플란트 보철 수복을 완료한 환자를 대상으로 하였다. 총 505명의 환자에서 697개의 임플란트를 추적 관찰하였다. 대상 환자의 전자 진료기록부와 방사선 사진을 통해 임플란트의 생존 여부 및 합병증을 기록하였으며 이에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 요인으로 고정체의 직경과 길이, 식립 위치 그리고 환자의 성별, 연령이 평가되었다. 결과: 생존율은 구치부 단일 임플란트의 3년 누적 생존율은 98.5%, 5년 누적 생존율은 94.4% 이었다. 5년 누적 생존율은 직경 4.0 mm 이하(89.5%)일 때보다 4.0 mm 초과(97.0%)일 때 더 높았고, 남성(92.4%)보다 여성(98.8%)에서 더 높았다. 이는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다 (P < .05). 구치부 단일 임플란트의 기계적 합병증은 20.1%, 생물학적 합병증은 4.7% 발생하였다. 합병증은 지대주 나사 풀림(7.5%), 보철물 탈락(6.3%), 인접면 접촉 상실(3.7%) 순으로 많이 발생하였다. 지대주 나사 풀림은 하악 대구치 부위(10.5%)에서 가장 많이 발생하였고 여성(5.1%)보다 남성(9.5%)에서, 65세 이상(5.1%)보다 65세 미만의 환자(9.4%)에서 더 많이 발생하였다. 이는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다 (P < .05). 결론: 구치부 단일 임플란트의 5년 누적 생존율은 고정체의 직경이 4.0 mm 이하일 때보다 4.0 mm 초과일 때, 남성보다 여성에서 더 높았다. 가장 많이 발생한 합병증인 지대주 나사 풀림은 하악 대구치 부위에서 가장 많이 발생하였고, 여성보다 남성에서, 65세 이상보다 65세 미만의 환자에서 더 많이 발생하였다. 이는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

2022학년도 원광대학교 교내 연구비 지원을 받았음.

References

  1. Levin L, Laviv A, Schwartz-Arad D. Long-term success of implants replacing a single molar. J Periodontol 2006;77:1528-32. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2006.060005
  2. Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100.
  3. Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, Zembic A, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:119-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x
  4. Kim Y, Park JY, Park SY, Oh SH, Jung Y, Kim JM, Yoo SY, Kim SK. Economic evaluation of single-tooth replacement: dental implant versus fixed partial denture. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:600-7. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3413
  5. Scheuber S, Hicklin S, Bragger U. Implants versus short-span fixed bridges: survival, complications, patients' benefits. A systematic review on economic aspects. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:50-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02543.x
  6. Albrektsson T, Jansson T, Lekholm U. Osseointegrated dental implants. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:151-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-8532(22)02100-0
  7. Smith DE, Zarb GA. Criteria for success of osseointegrated endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:567-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90081-4
  8. Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Zwahlen M, Thoma DS. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:2-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x
  9. Schneider D, Witt L, Hammerle CHF. Influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio on the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations: a cross-sectional retrospective 5-year investigation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:169-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02230.x
  10. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002;29:197-212; discussion 232-3. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.29.s3.12.x
  11. Figuero E, Graziani F, Sanz I, Herrera D, Sanz M. Management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Periodontol 2000 2014;66:255-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12049
  12. ElHoussiney AG, Zhang H, Song J, Ji P, Wang L, Yang S. Influence of implant location on the clinical outcomes of implant abutments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2018;10:19-35. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S143910
  13. Ravida A, Saleh MHA, Muriel MC, Maska B, Wang HL. Biological and technical complications of splinted or nonsplinted dental implants: a decision tree for selection. Implant Dent 2018;27:89-94. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000721
  14. Raikar S, Talukdar P, Kumari S, Panda SK, Oommen VM, Prasad A. Factors affecting the survival rate of dental implants: a retrospective study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2017;7:351-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_380_17
  15. Kotsovilis S, Fourmousis I, Karoussis IK, Bamia C. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of implant length on the survival of rough-surface dental implants. J Periodontol 2009;80:1700-18. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090107
  16. Bakaeen LG, Winkler S, Neff PA. The effect of implant diameter, restoration design, and occlusal table variations on screw loosening of posterior single-tooth implant restorations. J Oral Implantol 2001;27:63-72. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2001)027<0063:TEOIDR>2.3.CO;2
  17. Qian L, Todo M, Matsushita Y, Koyano K. Effects of implant diameter, insertion depth, and loading angle on stress/strain fields in implant/jawbone systems: finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:877-86.
  18. Goiato MC, Andreotti AM, Dos Santos DM, Nobrega AS, de Caxias FP, Bannwart LC. Influence of length, diameter and position of the implant in its fracture incidence: A systematic review. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2019;13:109-16. https://doi.org/10.15171/joddd.2019.017
  19. Ortega-Oller I, Suarez F, Galindo-Moreno P, Torrecillas-Martinez L, Monje A, Catena A, Wang HL. The influence of implant diameter on its survival: a meta-analysis based on prospective clinical trials. J Periodontol 2014;85:569-80. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2013.130043
  20. Ivanoff CJ, Grondahl K, Sennerby L, Bergstrom C, Lekholm U. Influence of variations in implant diameters: a 3- to 5-year retrospective clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:173-80. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199904000-00010
  21. Shinogaya T, Bakke M, Thomsen CE, Vilmann A, Sodeyama A, Matsumoto M. Effects of ethnicity, gender and age on clenching force and load distribution. Clin Oral Investig 2001;5:63-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007840000099
  22. Morgan MJ, James DF, Pilliar RM. Fractures of the fixture component of an osseointegrated implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:409-14.
  23. Gealh WC, Mazzo V, Barbi F, Camarini ET. Osseointegrated implant fracture: causes and treatment. J Oral Implantol 2011;37:499-503. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00135.1
  24. Lee KY, Shin KS, Jung JH, Cho HW, Kwon KH, Kim YL. Clinical study on screw loosening in dental implant prostheses: a 6-year retrospective study. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2020;46:133-42. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2020.46.2.133
  25. Cho SC, Small PN, Elian N, Tarnow D. Screw loosening for standard and wide diameter implants in partially edentulous cases: 3- to 7-year longitudinal data. Implant Dent 2004;13:245-50. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.id.0000140459.87333.f8
  26. Eckert SE, Wollan PC. Retrospective review of 1170 endosseous implants placed in partially edentulous jaws. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:415-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70155-6
  27. Lang LA, May KB, Wang RF. The effect of the use of a counter-torque device on the abutment-implant complex. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:411-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80007-9
  28. Hsu KW, Shen YF, Wei PC. Compatible CAD-CAM titanium abutments for posterior single-implant tooth replacement: A retrospective case series. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:363-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.07.023
  29. Wong AT, Wat PY, Pow EH, Leung KC. Proximal contact loss between implant-supported prostheses and adjacent natural teeth: a retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:e68-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12353
  30. Pang NS, Suh CS, Kim KD, Park W, Jung BY. Prevalence of proximal contact loss between implant-supported fixed prostheses and adjacent natural teeth and its associated factors: a 7-year prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:1501-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13018
  31. Chrcanovic BR, Kisch J, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Factors influencing the fracture of dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20:58-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12572
  32. Lee DW, Kim NH, Lee Y, Oh YA, Lee JH, You HK. Implant fracture failure rate and potential associated risk indicators: An up to 12-year retrospective study of implants in 5,124 patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019;30:206-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13407
  33. Galindo-Moreno P, Fernandez-Jimenez A, O'Valle F, Silvestre FJ, Sanchez-Fernandez E, Monje A, Catena A. Marginal bone loss in implants placed in grafted maxillary sinus. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17:373-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12092
  34. Serino G, Strom C. Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:169-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01627.x