Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science

Korean Academy of Periodontology (대한치주과학회)
권호 표지

Survival analysis of implants placed in the sinus floor elevated maxilla

상악동저 거상술 후 상악 구치부에 식립된 임플란트의 생존율에 대한 연구

  • Park, Jong-Yeon (Dept. of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Gwang-Ju MIR Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Ok-Su (Dept. of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Dental Science Research Institute) ;
  • Ryoo, Gyeong-Ho (Gwang-Ju MIR Dental Hospital)
  • 박종연 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 치주과학교실, 광주 미르치과병원) ;
  • 김옥수 (전남대학교 치의학전문대학원 치주과학교실, 치의학연구소) ;
  • 류경호 (광주 미르치과병원)
  • Published : 2007.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The sinus floor elevation procedures have been used to facilitate implant placement in the severely atrophic posterior maxilla. Many variables may have an influence on the outcomes of the sinus floor elevation in combination with implant treatment. The aim of this study was to analyze survival rate of implants placed in the edentulous maxillae of patients in whom sinus floor elevation was undertaken according to variables. Materials and Methods: It consisted of 96 patients(50 male and 46 female), ranging in age from 31 to 70 years(mean 49 years), who underwent sinus floor elevation procedure(94 implants in left side and 106 implants in right side) from 2001 to 2002. A total of 200 implants were placed in the grafted sinus(73 implants in lateral approach and 127 implants in crestal approach). All implants were restored by fixed prosthesis. All patients were healthy. Follow-up periods for implants were between 48 to 60 months. Results: The cumulative survival rate of implants was 91.5%. Gender, age and operation site did not have an influence on the survival rate. There was statistically significant differences for the implants which placed in less than 4 or 5 rom residual bone height, the survival rate was 60%, 81.4% respectively (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference of implants survival rate ac- cording to approach technique. The survival rate for 100% autogenous bone grafts was lower with respect to composite grafts containing autogenous bone and 100% substitutes. The survival rate for hydroxyapatite-coated implants was statistically significant lower than other textured group (p<0.05). Conclusion: Residual bone height, surface texture and graft materials have an influence on the survival rate. To use autogenous bone as a part of a composite bone replacement, implant texture which leads to more favorable implant-bone interface were necessary. To determine residual bone height for initial implant stability was important.

Keywords

References

  1. Mish CE, Bone Character: Second vital implant criterion, Dent Today 1998;7:39-40
  2. Friberg B, Sennerby L, Roos J, Lekholm U, Identification of bone quality in conjunction with insertion of titanium implants. A pilot study in jaw autopsy specimens, Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:213-219 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060403.x
  3. Graziani F, Donos N, Needleman I et al, Comparison of implant survival following sinus floor augmentation procedures with implants placed in pristine posterior maxillary bone: A systemic review, Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:677-682 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01116.x
  4. Wallace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systemic review. Ann Periodontal 2003;8:328-343 https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.328
  5. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613-617
  6. Summers RB. The osteotome technique: Part 3-less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1994;15:698-708
  7. Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R. Systematic review of survival rates for implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004;24:565-577
  8. Predecki P, Stephan JE, Auslaender BA, Mooney VL, Kirkand K. Kinetics of bone growth into cylindrical channels in aluminum oxide and titanium. J Biomed Mater Res 1972;6:375-400 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820060506
  9. Jensen OT. The sinus bone graft. 2nd ed, Quintessence Publishing Co., 2006:223-226
  10. Kent J, Block M. Simultaneously maxillary sinus floor bone grafting and placement of hydroxyapatite-coated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;47:238-242 https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(89)90225-5
  11. Block MS, Kent JM. Siuns augmentation for dental implants: The use of autogenous bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55: 1281-1286 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90185-3
  12. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implant: A review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25
  13. Rosenberg ES, Cho SC, Elian N et al, A comparison of characteristics of implant failure and survival in periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:873-879
  14. Hatano N, Shimizu Y, Ooya K.A. Clinical long-term radiographic evaluation of graft height changes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a 2:1 autogenous bone/xenograft mixture and simultaneous placement of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:339-345 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00996.x
  15. Fugazzotto PA, Vlassis J. Long-term success of sinus augmentation using various surgical approaches and grafting materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:52-58
  16. Hürzeler MB, Kirsch A, Ackermann KL, Qui ones CR. Reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla with dental implants in the augmented maxillary sinus: a 5-year clinical investigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:466-475
  17. Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS, Iacono VJ. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:11-45
  18. Ioannidou E, Dean JW. Osteotome sinus floor elevation and simultaneous, nonsubmerged implant placement: case report and literature review. J Periodontol 2000; 71:1613-1619 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.71.10.1613
  19. Toffler M. Minimally invasive sinus floor elevation procedures for simultaneous and staged implant placement. NY State Dent J 2004; 70: 38-44
  20. Hall D, McKenna SJ. Bone graft of the maxillary sinus floor for Br nemark implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin Noth Am 1991;3:869-875
  21. Hallmann M, Hedin M, Sennerby L et al.. A prospective 1-year clinical and radiographic study of implants placed after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with bovine hydroxyapatite and autogenous bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;60:227-284
  22. Jensen OT, Sennerby L. Histologic analysis of clinically retrieved titanium microimplants placed in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:513-521
  23. Jensen OT. Allogeneic bone or hydroxyapatite for the sinus lift procedure? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:771
  24. Valentini P, Abensur DJ. Maxillary sinus grafting with anorganic bovine bone: a clinical report of long-term results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:556-560
  25. Hising P, Bolin A, Branting C. Reconstruction of severely resorbed alveolar ridge crests with dental implants using a bovine bone mineral for augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:90-97
  26. Landi L, Pretel RW Jr, Hakimi NM et al, Maxillary sinus floor elevation using a combination of DFDBA and bovine-derived porous hydroxyapatite: a preliminary histologic and histomorphometric report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000;20:574-583
  27. Babbush CA, Kent JN, Misiek DJ. Titanium plasma-sprayed screw implants for the reconstruction of the edentulous mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1986;44:274-282 https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(86)90078-9
  28. Buser D, Schenk RK, Steinemann S et al, Influence of surface characteristics on bone integration of titanium implants. A histomorphometric study in miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:889-902 https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250708
  29. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T, Andersson B et al, A histomorphometric and removal torque study of screw-shaped titanium implants with three different surface topographies. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995; 6:24-30 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060103.x
  30. Lazzara RJ, Testori T, Trisi P et al, A human histologic analysis of osseotite and machined surfaces using implants with 2 opposing surfaces. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1999;19:117-129