Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2013.5.3.351

Assessment of demographic and clinical data related to dental implants in a group of Turkish patients treated at a university clinic  

Bural, Canan (Istanbul University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics)
Bilhan, Hakan (Istanbul University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics)
Cilingir, Altug (Istanbul University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics)
Geckili, Onur (Istanbul University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics)
Publication Information
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics / v.5, no.3, 2013 , pp. 351-358 More about this Journal
Abstract
PURPOSE. This retrospective study analyzed the distribution of the dental implants with regards to age and gender of the patients and type of indication for the implant therapy, as well as the location, dimension and type of the implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The data of demographics (age and gender), type of indication for implant therapy, anatomical location, dimensions (length and diameter) and type (bone and tissue level) of 1616 implants were recorded from patient charts between January 2000 and January 2010. Descriptive statistics were analyzed using a chi-squared test for demographic parameters, type of indication, tooth position, anatomical location, implant dimensions and type (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. The patient pool comprised of 350 women and 266 men, with a mean age of $52.12{\pm}13.79$ years. The difference in n% of the implants of the age groups was statistically significant between the types of indications. The difference in the position of the implants was statistically significant between the n% of the implants of all age groups. Gender did not significantly vary, except that the diameter of the implants was significantly higher for the standard diameter implants in males. The difference between the implant positions was statistically significant when considered according to indication. The relationship between implant length and anatomical location was statistically significant. CONCLUSION. The indication for dental implant use is age dependent and the type and size of the implant seems to be strongly related to the location of the implant.
Keywords
Age; Gender; Type of indication; Implant position; Implant diameter; Implant length;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 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.   DOI
2 Branemark PI, Adell R, Albrektsson T, Lekholm U, Lundkvist S, Rockler B. Osseointegrated titanium fixtures in the treatment of edentulousness. Biomaterials 1983;4:25-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindström J, Hallen O, Ohman A. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 1977;16:1-132.
4 Emami E, Heydecke G, Rompre PH, de Grandmont P, Feine JS. Impact of implant support for mandibular dentures on satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:533-44.
5 Allen PF, McMillan AS. A longitudinal study of quality of life outcomes in older adults requesting implant prostheses and complete removable dentures. tures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003;14:173-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Heydecke G, Locker D, Awad MA, Lund JP, Feine JS. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003;31:161-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Sonoyama W, Kuboki T, Okamoto S, Suzuki H, Arakawa H, Kanyama M, Yatani H, Yamashita A. Quality of life assessment in patients with implant-supported and resin-bonded fixed prosthesis for bounded edentulous spaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:359-64.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Muller F, Wahl G, Fuhr K. Age-related satisfaction with complete dentures, desire for improvement and attitudes to implant treatment. Gerodontology 1994;11:7-12.   DOI
9 Levin L, Sadet P, Grossmann Y. A retrospective evaluation of 1,387 single-tooth implants: a 6-year follow-up. J Periodontol 2006;77:2080-3.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Eckert SE, Wollan PC. Retrospective review of 1170 endosseous implants placed in partially edentulous jaws. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:415-21.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi K, Linden U, Bergstrom C, van Steenberghe D. Survival of the Branemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: a 10-year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14: 639-45.
12 Lazzara R, Siddiqui AA, Binon P, Feldman SA, Weiner R, Phillips R, Gonshor A. Retrospective multicenter analysis of 3i endosseous dental implants placed over a five-year period. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:73-83.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Noack N, Willer J, Hoffmann J. Long-term results after placement of dental implants: longitudinal study of 1,964 implants over 16 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14:748-55.
14 Lee JH, Frias V, Lee KW, Wright RF. Effect of implant size and shape on implant success rates: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94:377-81.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Hong SJ, Paik JW, Kim CS, Choi SH, Lee KW, Chai JK, Kim CK, Cho KS. The Study of Implant Patient's Type and Implant Distribution. J Korean Acad Periodontol 2002;32: 539-54.
16 Bornstein MM, Halbritter S, Harnisch H, Weber HP, Buser D. A retrospective analysis of patients referred for implant placement to a specialty clinic: indications, surgical procedures, and early failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23:1109-16.
17 van der Zee E, van Waas M, Broek M, van der Mieden van Opmeer R. Changes in the provision of implant-supported prostheses at the Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA) from 1989 to 1995. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:316-20.
18 Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, Belser UC, Lang NP. 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Telleman G, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, den Hartog L, Huddleston Slater JJ, Meijer HJ. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. J Clin Periodontol 2011;38:667-76.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Arisan V, Bolukbasi N, Ersanli S, Ozdemir T. Evaluation of 316 narrow diameter implants followed for 5-10 years: a clinical and radiographic retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:296-307.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Shin SW, Bryant SR, Zarb GA. A retrospective study on the treatment outcome of wide-bodied implants. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:52-8.
22 Becker W, Berg L, Becker BE. Untreated periodontal disease: a longitudinal study. J Periodontol 1979;50:234-44.   DOI
23 Davis EL, Albino JE, Tedesco LA, Portenoy BS, Ortman LF. Expectations and satisfaction of denture patients in a university clinic. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55:59-63.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Brunski JB. In vivo bone response to biomechanical loading at the bone/dental-implant interface. Adv Dent Res 1999;13: 99-119.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Watzek G. Oral implants-quo vadis? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21:831-2.
26 Froum SJ, Cho SC, Cho YS, Elian N, Tarnow D. Narrowdiameter implants: a restorative option for limited interdental space. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007;27:449-55.
27 Hirschfeld L, Wasserman B. A long-term survey of tooth loss in 600 treated periodontal patients. J Periodontol 1978; 49:225-37.   DOI
28 Ulm C, Kneissel M, Schedle A, Solar P, Matejka M, Schneider B, Donath K. Characteristic features of trabecular bone in edentulous maxillae. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:459-67.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Goodacre CJ, Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K. Clinical complications of osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81: 537-52.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Griffin TJ, Cheung WS. The use of short, wide implants in posterior areas with reduced bone height: a retrospective investigation. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:139-44.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Lazzara RJ. Criteria for implant selection: surgical and prosthetic considerations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1994; 6:55-62.
32 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.
33 Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:313-23.
34 Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Tecucianu JF, Celletti R, Lazzara R. Small-diameter implants: indications and contraindications. J Esthet Dent 2000;12:186-94.   DOI
35 Atwood DA. Reduction of residual ridges: a major oral disease entity. J Prosthet Dent 1971;26:266-79.   DOI   ScienceOn
36 Razavi R, Zena RB, Khan Z, Gould AR. Anatomic site evaluation of edentulous maxillae for dental implant placement. J Prosthodont 1995;4:90-4.   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Schropp L, Kostopoulos L, Wenzel A. Bone healing following immediate versus delayed placement of titanium implants into extraction sockets: a prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:189-99.
38 Barber HD, Seckinger RJ. The role of the small-diameter dental implant: a preliminary report on the Miniplant system. Compendium 1994;15:1390,1392.