Browse > Article

A retrospective study of survival rate of dental implants placed in osteoporosis patients  

Lee, Geun (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Um, Yoo-Jung (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Jung, Ui-Won (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Kim, Chang-Sung (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Choi, Seong-Ho (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Cho, Kyoo-Sung (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Chai, Jung-Kiu (Department of Periodontology, Research institute of periodontal regeneration, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Publication Information
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science / v.39, no.4, 2009 , pp. 413-423 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The presented study aims to evaluate the effects of osteoporosis on dental implants by analyzing a 12-year cumulative survival rate of implants placed in patients with osteoporosis. Methods: 37 patients with history of osteoporosis were selected from a pool of dental implant patients treated at the Department of Periodontology in Yonsei University Hospital between 1993 and 2007. The cumulative survival rate is quantified using data collected from 164 placed implants in the selected 37 patients. Results: 3 out of the 164 implants failed and the cumulative survival rate was observed at 95.1%. The survival rates of the implants according to patients' age were 97.41% (<60) and 100% ($60\leq$). The lower survival rate was directly proportional to younger age, and this relationship is statistically significant (P<0.05). The survival rates of implants according to diagnostic criteria were 95.45% (osteopenia) and 98.59% (osteoporosis; 2 out of 142 implants placed in osteoporosis patients failed). The difference in the two survival rates is statistically significant (P<0.05). The survival rates according to the region of implants do not have statistically significant difference. The survival rates according to the different length and diameter of the implants do not have statistically significant difference. The survival rates of implants accompanied and not accompanied by bone augmentation were 92.11% and 100%, respectively. The difference in the two survival rates is statistically significant (P<0.05). The survival rates of implants placed in patients with and without history of medication for osteoporosis treatment are 96.67% and 99.04%, respectively. The difference in the two survival rates is statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions: A high cumulative survival rate of dental implants, similar to one found in non-osteoporosis patients, is observed in osteoporosis patients, indicating the possibility that placing dental implants on patients with osteoporosis can be considered with high treatment predictability.
Keywords
dental implants; osteoporosis; survival rate;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Okamura A, Ayukawa Y, Iyama S, Koyano K. Effect of the difference of bone turnover on peri-titanium the difference of bone turnover on peri-titanium implant osteogenesis in ovariectomized rats. J Biomed Mater Res A 2004;70:497-505   PUBMED
2 Jiang G, Matsumoto H, Fujii A. Mandible bone loss in osteoporosis rats. J Bone Miner Metab 2003;21:388-395   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Cao T, Shirota T, Tamazaki M, Ohno K, Michi KI. Mineral bone loss in partially edentulous trabeculae of ovariectomized rabbit mandibles. J Periodontal Res 2004;39:37-41   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Raisz LG. Pathogenesis of osteoporosis: concepts, conflicts, and prospects. J Clin Invest 2005;115:3318-3325   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Keller JC, Stewart M, Roehm M, Schneider GB. Osteoporosis-like bone conditions affect ossointegration of implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:687-694   PUBMED
6 Blomqvist JE, Alberius P, Isaksson S, Linde A, hansson BG. Factors in implant integration failure after bond grafting: an osteometric and endocrinologic matched analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;25:63-68   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Toffler M. Osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:266-273   PUBMED
8 Buser D, Weber HP, Lang NP. Tissue integration of non-submerged implants. 1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1990;1:33-40   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Teegarden D, Proulx WR, Martin BR et al. Peak bone mass in young women. J Bone Miner Res 1995;10:711-715   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Riggs BL, Melton LJ 3rd. Involutional osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1676-1686   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
11 Kribbs PI, Smith DA, Chesnut CH. Oral findings in osteoporosis. Part I: measurement of mandibular bone density. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:576-579   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Southard KA, Southard TE, Schlechte JA, Meis PA, The relationship between the density of the alveolar processes and that of post-cranial bone. J Dent Res 2000;79:964-969   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Cochran DL, Buser D, ten Burugenakte C et al. The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and etched (SLA) surface : early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:144-153   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Lum LB. A biomechanical rationale for the use of short implants. J Oral Implantol 1991;17:126-131   PUBMED
15 Erdogan O, Shafer DM, Taxel P, Freilich MA. A review of the association between osteoporosis and alveolar ridge augmentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;104:738.e1-13   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Mombelli A, Cionca N. Systemic diseases affecting osseointegration therapy. Clin Oral Implant Res 2006;17:97-103   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Watts, Nelson B. Osteonocrosis of the jaw. South Med J 2008;101:160-165   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
18 Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Komarek A, van Steenberghe D. Implact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of late oral implant loss. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:670-677   DOI   ScienceOn
19 An Editorial Department of The Korean society of bone metabolism. Treatment guidelines of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis. 3rd ed. Seoul: The Korean society of bone metabolism; 2006:463-492
20 Shibli JA, Grassi S, de Figueiredo LC et al. Influence of implant surface tomography on early osseointegration: A histological study in human jaws. J biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2007;80:377-385   PUBMED
21 Kanis JA, Melton LJ III, Christiansen C, Johnston CC, Khaltaev N. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:1137-1141   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Lane JM, Russell L, Khan SN. Osteoporosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000;372:139-150   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Yang J, Farnell D, Devlin H, horner K, Graham J. The effect of ovariectomy on mandibular cortical thickness in the rat. J Dent 2005;33:123-129   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Komarek A, van Steenberghe D. Implact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of oral implant failures, up to abutment connection. J Clin Periodontol 2007;34:610-617   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Schnitman PA, Rubenstein JE, Whrle PS, DaSilva JD, Koch GG. Implants for partial edentulism. J Dent Educ 1988;52:725-736   PUBMED
26 Schliephake H, neukam FW, wichmann M. Survival analysis of endosseous implants in bone grafts used for the treatment of severe alveolar ridge atrophy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55:1227-1233   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Esposito M, Hirsch J-M, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci 1998;106:527-551   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Holahan CM, Koka S, Kennel KA et al. Effect of osteoporotic status on the survival of titanium dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;23:905-910
29 Kribbs PJ, Smith DA, Chesnut CH, Ott SM, Kilcoyne RF. Relationship between mandibular and skeletal bone in an osteoporotic population. J Prothet Dent 1989;62:703-707   DOI   ScienceOn
30 van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R, Desnyder M, Maffei G, Quirynen M. The relative impact of local and endogenous patient-related factors on implant failure up to the abutment stage. Clin Oral Impl Res 2002;13:617-622   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B et al. A 15 year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416   DOI   PUBMED
32 Nico C. Geurs. Osteoporosis and periodontal disease. Periodontol 2000 2007;44:29-43   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Kanis JA. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: synopsis of a WHO report. WHO study group. Osteoporosis Int 1994;4:368-381   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Raisz LG, Rodan GA. Pathogenesis of osteoporosis. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2003;32:15-24   DOI   ScienceOn
35 Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP et al. Long-term evaluation of prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-172   DOI   ScienceOn
36 Geurs NC, Lewis CE, Jeffcoat MK. Osteoporosis and periodontal disease progression. Periodontol 2000 2003;32:105-110   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Friberg B, Ekestubbe A, Mellstrom D, Sennerby L. Branemark Implants and Osteoporosis. A Clinical Exploratory Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2001;3:50-56   DOI   ScienceOn
38 Jeffcoat MK, Lewis CE, Reddy MS, Wang CY, Redford M. Post-menopausal bone loss and its relationship to oral bone loss. Periodontol 2000 2000;23:94-102   DOI   ScienceOn
39 Grassi S, Piattelli A, Ferrari DS et al. Histological evaluation of human bone integration on machined and sandblasted acid-etched titanium surfaces in type IV bone. J Oral Implantol 2007;33:8-12   DOI   ScienceOn
40 Elders PJ, Habets LL, Netelenbos JC, van der Linden LW, van der Stelt PF. The relation between periodontitis and systemic bone mass in women between 46 and 55 years of age. J Clin Periodontol 1992;19:492-496   DOI   PUBMED