• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.38 no.sup2
• /
• pp.309-316
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the survival rates of implants placed in grafted maxillary sinuses and compare the results obtained with graft materials, implant surfaces and timing of implant placement. Materials and Methods: Between January 1996 and December 2005, 391 implants were placed in 161 patients who underwent sinus grafting treatment simultaneously or separately at Ewha Womans University Hospital. According to inclusion criteria, 272 implants were placed in 102 patients with 112 sinus grafts (30 females, 72 males), aged 26 to 88 years (mean age $49.0{\pm}9.7$). The follow-up period ranged from 12 to 134 months (mean F/U $47{\pm}32$). Survival rates were evaluated according to graft material, implant surface and timing of implant placement. The Kaplan-Meier procedure and the log rank (Mantel-Cox) test were used to estimate survival rates and test for equality of survival rates between different groups of patients. Results: Ten-year cumulative survival rate for implants placed in the grafted sinuses was 90.1%. The survival rates for autogenous bone, combination and bone substitutes were 94.6%, 85.9% and 100%, respectively (p > 0.05). According to implant surface, survival rates were 84.8% in machined group and 97.5% in rough group (p < 0.05). The survival rates were 92.9% in delayed group and 86.0% in simultaneous group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Ten-year cumulative survival rate for implants placed in the grafted sinuses was 90.1%. Rough-surfaced implants have a higher survival rate than machined-surfaced implants when placed in grafted sinuses (p < 0.05).

• 대한치주과학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2005.11a
• /
• pp.225-225
• /
• 2005

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.39
• /
• pp.21.1-21.6
• /
• 2017

Background: The purposes of the present study were to compare implant stabilities of mandibular block bone graft and bovine bone graft and to evaluate influencing factors for implant stability in mandibular block bone (MBB) graft. Methods: This retrospective study investigated 1224 cases and 389 patients treated by one surgeon in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of Pusan National University Dental Hospital (Yangsan, Korea) between January 2010 and December 2014. Proportions that MBB graft cases constitute in all implant restoration cases and in all bone graft cases were measured. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were achieved by the same surgeon before loading. The average ISQ values of the experimental groups were compared. In addition, ISQ values of influencing factors, such as age, sex, implant size, and implant placement site, were compared within the MBB group using $Osstell^{TM}$ Mentor ($Osstell^{(R)}$, $G{\ddot{o}}teborg$, Sweden). Paired t test and ANOVA were conducted for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05. Results: Fifty-five percent of all implant restoration cases performed bone graft while MBB cases constituted 34% of all implant restoration cases and 61% of all bone graft cases. Comparing ISQ values according to bone graft materials, the MBB group manifested sufficient implant stability by presenting comparable ISQ value to that of the experimental group without bone graft. Among the reviewed factors, females, mandibular molar regions, and implants in larger diameter displayed greater implant stabilities. Conclusions: Satisfactory implant stability was accomplished upon administration of MBB graft. Within the limitation of this study, gender, implant site, and implant diameter were speculated to influence on implant stability in MBB graft.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.49 no.5
• /
• pp.287-298
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the prevalence of early implant failure using a single implant system and to identify the factors contributing to early implant failure. Methods: Patients who received implant treatment with a single implant system ($Luna^{(R)}$, Shinhung, Seoul, Korea) at Dankook University Dental Hospital from 2015 to 2017 were enrolled. The following data were collected for analysis: sex and age of the patient, seniority of the surgeon, diameter and length of the implant, position in the dental arch, access approach for sinus-floor elevation, and type of guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure. The effect of each predictor was evaluated using the crude hazard ratio and the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) in univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, respectively. Results: This study analyzed 1,031 implants in 409 patients, who comprised 169 females and 240 males with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range [IQR], 47-61 years) and were followed up for a median of 7.2 months (IQR, 5.6-9.9 months) after implant placement. Thirty-five implants were removed prior to final prosthesis delivery, and the cumulative survival rate in the early phase at the implant level was 95.6%. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that seniority of the surgeon (residents: aHR=2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-5.94) and the jaw in which the implant was placed (mandible: aHR=2.31; 95% CI, 1.12-4.76) exerted statistically significant effects on early implant failure after adjusting for sex, age, dimensions of the implant, and type of GBR procedure (preoperative and/or simultaneous) (P<0.05). Conclusions: Prospective studies are warranted to further elucidate the factors contributing to early implant failure. In the meantime, surgeons should receive appropriate training and carefully select the bone bed in order to minimize the risk of early implant failure.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.51 no.3
• /
• pp.251-260
• /
• 2021

Purpose: Dental implants are widely used for the rehabilitation of edentulous sites. This study investigated the occurrence of dental implant malpositioning as shown on post-implantation cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to identify related factors. Materials and Methods: Samples with at least 1 malpositioned dental implant were collected from a central radiology clinic in Tehran, Iran from January 2017 to January 2019. Variables such as demographic characteristics, length and diameter of implants, type of implant, sites of implant insertion, different types of implant malpositioning problems (cortical plate perforation, interference with anatomical structures), angulation of the implant, and the severity of malpositioning were assessed. In addition, the incidence of implant fracture and over-drilling was evaluated. Data were statistically analyzed using the chi-square test, 1-sample t-test, and Spearman correlation coefficients. Results: In total, 252 patients referred for implant postoperative CBCT evaluations were assessed. The cases of implant malpositioning included perforation of the buccal cortical plate (19.4%), perforation of the lingual cortical plate (14.3%), implant proximity to an adjacent implant (19.0%), implant proximity to an adjacent tooth (3.2%), interference with anatomical structures(maxillary sinus: 18.3%, mandibular canal: 11.1%, nasal cavity: 6.3%, mental foramen: 5.6%, and incisive canal: 0.4%). Implant fracture and over-drilling were found in 1.6% and 0.8% of cases, respectively. Severity was categorized as mild (9.5%), moderate (35.7%), severe (37.7%), and extreme (17.1%), and 52.4% of implants had inappropriate angulation. Conclusion: CBCT imaging is recommended for detecting dental implant malpositioning. The most common and severe type of malpositioning was buccal cortex perforation.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.50 no.6
• /
• pp.379-391
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The aims of this study were to evaluate the 5-year cumulative survival rate (CSR) of implants placed with guided bone regeneration (GBR) compared to implants placed in native bone, and to identify factors contributing to implant failure in regenerated bone. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 240 patients who had implant placement either with a GBR procedure (regenerated bone group) or with pristine bone (native bone group). Data on demographic features (age, sex, smoking, and medical history), location of the implant, implant-specific features, and grafting procedures and materials were collected. The 5-year CSRs in both groups were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Risk factors for implant failure were analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: In total, 264 implants in the native bone group and 133 implants in the regenerated bone group were analyzed. The 5-year CSRs were 96.4% in the regenerated bone group and 97.5% in the native bone group, which was not a significant difference. The multivariable analysis confirmed that bone status was not an independent risk factor for implant failure. However, smoking significantly increased the failure rate (hazard ratio, 10.7; P=0.002). Conclusions: The 5-year CSR of implants placed in regenerated bone using GBR was comparable to that of implants placed in native bone. Smoking significantly increased the risk of implant failure in both groups.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.185-192
• /
• 2019

Purpose: Implant wall thickness and the height of the implant-abutment interface are known as factors that affect the distribution of stress on the marginal bone around the implant. The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of supracrestal implant placement and implant wall thickness on maintenance of the marginal bone level. Methods: In this retrospective study, 101 patients with a single implant were divided into the following 4 groups according to the thickness of the implant wall and the initial implant placement level immediately after surgery: 0.75 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, epicrestal position; 0.75 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position; 0.95 mm wall thickness, supracrestal position. The marginal bone level change was assessed 1 day after implant placement, immediately after functional loading, and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis delivery. To compare the marginal bone level change, repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the statistical significance of differences within groups and between groups over time. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to analyze the correlation between implant placement level and bone loss. Results: Statistically significant differences in bone loss among the 4 groups (P<0.01) and within each group over time (P<0.01) were observed. There was no significant difference between the groups with a wall thickness of 0.75 mm and 0.95 mm. In a multiple comparison, the groups with a supracrestal placement level showed greater bone loss than the epicrestal placement groups. In addition, a significant correlation between implant placement level and marginal bone loss was observed. Conclusions: The degree of bone resorption was significantly higher for implants with a supracrestal placement compared to those with an epicrestal placement.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.114-124
• /
• 2023

Dental implants have been utilized for many years to treat individuals with missing teeth. To optimize the long-term success rate of such implants, new designs, surfaces, and materials have been analyzed. It is important for the clinician to have a background in the field of implant surface design, to be familiar with the strengths and limitations of the available options, and to be aware of the alterations in surface structure that may occur following installation. This article provides a detailed review of the structure and the surface characteristics of dental implants, the modifications of implant surface, as well as the methods of evaluating implant surface structure. Moreover, it provides information concerning the structural changes that may take place at the time of dental implant placement. It is important for clinicians to be aware of such changes to plan and execute implant procedures with the highest possible success and implant survival rates.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.639-651
• /
• 2006

This study was performed to investigate the survival rate of single implant used in maxillary anterior region during follow up periods. 231 patients whose single missing tooth in maxillary region had been replaced with 237 implant at the periodontal dept. of Yonsei University Hospital between February 1993 and December 2004. The following results are compiled from 231 patients who received single implant surgery. 1. The major cause of single tooth loss in maxillary anterior region is trauma, followed by periodontal disease and congenital missing. 2. The total survival rate of single implant placed in maxillary anterior region is 94.5%. 3. The survival rate of single implant placed in type II and type IV was 100% and in type III was 92.7%. As for the bone quantity, the survival rate in type A(100%) was most, followed by type B(97.3%) and type C, D (93.5%). 4. The survival rate of implant placement combined with advanced surgery was 94.4%. The results showed that the placement of single implant is considered as a reliable treatment option for a single missing tooth in maxillary anterior region except in certain extreme conditions especially with poor bone quality and quantity.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.449-460
• /
• 2005

Objectives Aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical use and the efficacy of Frialit-2 implant system. Experimental Methods Fifty nine patients received placement of Frilalit-2 implants(137 implants) in their maxillary anterior and posterior sites(40 and 97 implants). Intraoral & clinical examination, chart review and radiographs were taken from each patient. Results 1. The total implant survival rate was 92.7% after a mean follow-up period of 19.9 months. 2. The implant survival rate placed in anterior region was 97.5%. 3. The implant survival rate placed in posterior region was 90.7%. 4. The implant survival rate placed in atrophic posterior maxilla with advanced technique (GBR, Sinus elevation) was 87.2%. 5. The implant survival rate placed in type N(D4) bone was 82%, while 95.7% in type III (D3), and 100% in type II(D2) bone. 6. Most of the failed implants(7 of 10) were removed during the maintenance stage after prosthodontic treatment. Conclusion It was concluded that Frialit-2 implant could be used satisfactorily in the esthetic anterior region, but the use in the posterior region, especially with poor bone quality and quantity, further studies are needed.