Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The cumulative survival rate of sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched dental implants: a retrospective analysis

  • Haeji Yum (Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Hee-seung Han (Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kitae Kim (Department of Molecular Genetics, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University) ;
  • Sungtae Kim (Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Young-Dan Cho (Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital)
  • Received : 2023.03.01
  • Accepted : 2023.05.11
  • Published : 2024.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This retrospective study aimed to assess the long-term cumulative survival rate of titanium, sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched implants over a 10-year follow-up period and investigate the factors affecting the survival rate and change in marginal bone loss (MBL). Methods: The study included 400 patients who underwent dental implant placement at the Department of Periodontology of Seoul National University Dental Hospital (SNUDH) between 2005 and 2015. Panoramic radiographic images and dental records of patients were collected and examined using Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, and multiple regression analysis to determine the survival rates and identify any factors related to implant failure and MBL. Results: A total of 782 implants were placed with a follow-up period ranging from 0 to 16 years (mean: 8.21±3.75 years). Overall, 25 implants were lost, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 96.8%. Comparisons of the research variables regarding cumulative survival rate mostly yielded insignificant results. The mean mesial and distal MBLs were 1.85±2.31 mm and 1.59±2.03 mm, respectively. Factors influencing these values included age, diabetes mellitus (DM), jaw location, implant diameter, bone augmentation surgery, and prosthetic unit. Conclusions: This study found that the implant survival rates at SNUDH fell within the acceptable published criteria. The patients' sex, age, DM status, implant location, implant design, implant size, surgical type, bone augmentation, and prosthetic unit had no discernible influence on long-term implant survival. Sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched implants might offer advantages in terms of implant longevity and consistent clinical outcomes.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by a grant from Dentium Co., Ltd. (ERI22024).

References

  1. Albrektsson T, Branemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindstrom J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155-70. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678108991776
  2. Moberg LE, Kondell PA, Sagulin GB, Bolin A, Heimdahl A, Gynther GW. Branemark System and ITI Dental Implant System for treatment of mandibular edentulism. A comparative randomized study: 3-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:450-61. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120504.x
  3. Hjalmarsson L, Gheisarifar M, Jemt T. A systematic review of survival of single implants as presented in longitudinal studies with a follow-up of at least 10 years. Eur J Oral Implantology 2016;9 Suppl 1:S155-62.
  4. 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
  5. Lang NP, Berglundh T, Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Pjetursson BE, Salvi GE, Sanz M. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding implant survival and complications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19 Suppl:150-4.
  6. Howe MS, Keys W, Richards D. Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: a systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. J Dent 2019;84:9-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008
  7. Dreyer H, Grischke J, Tiede C, Eberhard J, Schweitzer A, Toikkanen SE, et al. Epidemiology and risk factors of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Periodontal Res 2018;53:657-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.12562
  8. Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Reasons for failures of oral implants. J Oral Rehabil 2014;41:443-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12157
  9. Atieh MA, Alsabeeha NH, Faggion CM Jr, Duncan WJ. The frequency of peri-implant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2013;84:1586-98. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2012.120592
  10. Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Stein BE, Balshi SF. A long-term retrospective analysis of survival rates of implants in the mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015;30:1348-54. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3910
  11. 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
  12. Jang HW, Kang JK, Lee K, Lee YS, Park PK. A retrospective study on related factors affecting the survival rate of dental implants. J Adv Prosthodont 2011;3:204-15. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2011.3.4.204
  13. Medikeri RS, Pereira MA, Waingade M, Navale S. Survival of surface-modified short versus long implants in complete or partially edentulous patients with a follow-up of 1 year or more: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2022;52:261-81. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2007340367
  14. Schatzle M, Mannchen R, Balbach U, Hammerle CH, Toutenburg H, Jung RE. Stability change of chemically modified sandblasted/acid-etched titanium palatal implants. A randomized-controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:489-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01694.x
  15. Buser D, Janner SF, Wittneben JG, Bragger U, Ramseier CA, Salvi GE. 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:839-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00456.x
  16. Kligman S, Ren Z, Chung CH, Perillo MA, Chang YC, Koo H, et al. The impact of dental implant surface modifications on osseointegration and biofilm formation. J Clin Med 2021;10:1641.
  17. De Smet E, Jacobs R, Gijbels F, Naert I. The accuracy and reliability of radiographic methods for the assessment of marginal bone level around oral implants. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002;31:176-81. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600694
  18. Schwarz F, Derks J, Monje A, Wang HL. Peri-implantitis. J Periodontol 2018;89 Suppl 1:S267-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.16-0350
  19. 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 Suppl 6:2-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02547.x
  20. Song DW, Lee DW, Kim CK, Park KH, Moon IS. Comparative analysis of peri-implant marginal bone loss based on microthread location: a 1-year prospective study after loading. J Periodontol 2009;80:1937-44. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090330
  21. Jin ZH, Peng MD, Li Q. The effect of implant neck microthread design on stress distribution of peri-implant bone with different level: a finite element analysis. J Dent Sci 2020;15:466-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2019.12.003
  22. Sodnom-Ish B, Eo MY, Nguyen TT, Kim MJ, Kim SM. Clinical feasibility and benefits of a tapered, sandblasted, and acid-etched surfaced tissue-level dental implant. Int J Implant Dent 2020;6:39.
  23. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008;17:5-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181676059
  24. Geraets W, Zhang L, Liu Y, Wismeijer D. Annual bone loss and success rates of dental implants based on radiographic measurements. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014;43:20140007.
  25. Negri M, Galli C, Smerieri A, Macaluso GM, Manfredi E, Ghiacci G, et al. The effect of age, gender, and insertion site on marginal bone loss around endosseous implants: results from a 3-year trial with premium implant system. BioMed Res Int 2014;2014:369051.
  26. Bryant SR, Zarb GA. Osseointegration of oral implants in older and younger adults. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:492-9.
  27. Mellado-Valero A, Ferrer Garcia JC, Herrera Ballester A, Labaig Rueda C. Effects of diabetes on the osseointegration of dental implants. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2007;12:E38-43.
  28. Souto-Maior JR, Pellizzer EP, de Luna Gomes JM, Dds CAAL, Dds JFSJ, Vasconcelos BC, et al. Influence of diabetes on the survival rate and marginal bone loss of dental implants: an overview of systematic reviews. J Oral Implantol 2019;45:334-40. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-19-00087
  29. Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35:292-304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01275.x
  30. Ormianer Z, Block J, Matalon S, Kohen J. The effect of moderately controlled type 2 diabetes on dental implant survival and peri-implant bone loss: a long-term retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2018;33:389-94. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5838
  31. Lin G, Ye S, Liu F, He F. A retrospective study of 30,959 implants: risk factors associated with early and late implant loss. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45:733-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12898
  32. Tallarico M, Xhanari E, Pisano M, De Riu G, Tullio A, Meloni SM. Single post-extractive ultra-wide 7 mm-diameter implants versus implants placed in molar healed sites after socket preservation for molar replacement: 6-month post-loading results from a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantology 2016;9:263-75.
  33. Javed F, Romanos GE. Role of implant diameter on long-term survival of dental implants placed in posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1333-z
  34. Roccuzzo M, Savoini M, Dalmasso P, Ramieri G. Long-term outcomes of implants placed after vertical alveolar ridge augmentation in partially edentulous patients: a 10-year prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:1204-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12941
  35. Lutz R, Neukam FW, Simion M, Schmitt CM. Long-term outcomes of bone augmentation on soft and hard-tissue stability: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26 Suppl 11:103-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12635
  36. Urban IA, Monje A, Lozada JL, Wang HL. Long-term evaluation of peri-implant bone level after reconstruction of severely atrophic edentulous maxilla via vertical and horizontal guided bone regeneration in combination with sinus augmentation: a case series with 1 to 15 years of loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2017;19:46-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12431
  37. Pjetursson BE, Bragger U, Lang NP, Zwahlen M. Comparison of survival and complication rates of toothsupported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs). Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18 Suppl 3:97-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01439.x
  38. Alhammadi SH, Burnside G, Milosevic A. Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study. BMC Oral Health 2021;21:171.
  39. Katsavochristou A, Koumoulis D. Incidence of abutment screw failure of single or splinted implant prostheses: a review and update on current clinical status. J Oral Rehabil 2019;46:776-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12817
  40. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-72. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x