Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • 제33권3호
  • /
  • Pages.241-248
  • /
  • 2011
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
대한악안면성형재건외과학회 (Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons)
권호 표지

상악동 거상술을 동반한 임플란트의 생존율에 관한 기여인자

Factors Affecting Survival of Maxillary Sinus Augmented Implants

  • 인연수 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 박영욱 (강릉원주대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실)
  • In, Yeon-Soo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Park, Young-Wook (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • 투고 : 20100000
  • 심사 : 20100000
  • 발행 : 2011.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: The aim of this study was to present the clinical results of maxillary sinus augmentation implants and to evaluate the effects of various factors on the implant survival rate. Methods: In a total of 112 patients, 293 implants after sinus augmentation were performed. The total survival rate and the influence of the following factors on implant survival were evaluated; patient characteristics (sex, age, smoking, general disease), graft material, implant surface, implant installation stage, site of implant placement, length and width of implant, closure method for osseous window, residual alveolar bone height. Results: 1. Age ranged from 16 to 70 yr, with a mean of 45.7 yr. 2. Cumulative survival rate for the 293 implants with the maxillary sinus augmentation procedure was 94.9%. 3. Simultaneous implant installation was performed in 122 patients and delayed implant installation was performed in 117 implants. The average healing period after sinus elevation was 7.3 months for delayed implant installation and this procedure had a significantly higher survival rate. 4. There were no significant differences in sex, age, smoking, general disease, site of implant placement, length and width of implant, residual alveolar bone height and the survival rate. 5. RBM (Resorbable Blasting Media) implant surface and allograft groups had significantly lower survival rates. Conclusion: These data suggest that maxillary sinus augmentation may give more predictable results for autogenous bone grafts and delayed implant placement.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Tatum H Jr. Maxillary sinus grafting for endosseous implants. Lecture presented at the Annual Meeting of the Alabama Implant Study Group. Birmingham: AL; 1977. p.13-4.
  2. Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:207-29.
  3. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613-6.
  4. Summers RB. The osteotome technique: Part 3--Less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compendium 1994;15:698,700,702-4.
  5. Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium 1994;15:152,154-6,158.
  6. Denissen HW, Kalk W, de Nieuport HM, Maltha JC, van de Hooff A. Mandibular bone response to plasma-sprayed coatings of hydroxyapatite. Int J Prosthodont 1990;3:53-8.
  7. Gottlander M, Albrektsson T. Histomorphometric studies of hydroxylapatite-coated and uncoated CP titanium threaded implants in bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:399-404.
  8. Oonishi H, Yamamoto M, Ishimaru H, et al. The effect of hydroxyapatite coating on bone growth into porous titanium alloy implants. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989;71:213-6.
  9. Smiler DG, Johnson PW, Lozada JL, et al. Sinus lift grafts and endosseous implants. Treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla. Dent Clin North Am 1992;36:151-86.
  10. Meredith N. Assessment of implant stability as a prognostic determinant. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:491-501.
  11. O'Sullivan D, Sennerby L, Meredith N. Measurements comparing the initial stability of five designs of dental implants: a human cadaver study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2:85-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00110.x
  12. Gentile MA, Chuang SK, Dodson TB. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 x 5.7-mm implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:930-7.
  13. Graves SL, Jansen CE, Siddiqui AA, Beaty KD. Wide diameter implants: indications, considerations and preliminary results over a two-year period. Aust Prosthodont J 1994;8:31-7.
  14. Ivanoff CJ, Sennerby L, Johansson C, Rangert B, Lekholm U. Influence of implant diameters on the integration of screw implants. An experimental study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;26:141-8.
  15. Tarnow DP, Wallace SS, Froum SJ, Rohrer MD, Cho SC. Histologic and clinical comparison of bilateral sinus floor elevations with and without barrier membrane placement in 12 patients: Part 3 of an ongoing prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000;20:117-25.
  16. Tawil G, Mawla M. Sinus floor elevation using a bovine bone mineral (Bio-Oss) with or without the concomitant use of a bilayered collagen barrier (Bio-Gide): a clinical report of immediate and delayed implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:713-21.
  17. Wallace SS, Froum SJ. Effect of maxillary sinus augmentation on the survival of endosseous dental implants. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol 2003;8:328-43. https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.328
  18. Jemt T, Chai J, Harnett J, et al. A 5-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:291-8.
  19. Strietzel FP, Reichart PA, Kale A, Kulkarni M, Wegner B, Kuchler I. Smoking interferes with the prognosis of dental implant treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2007;34:523-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2007.01083.x
  20. Zitzmann NU, Scharer P. Sinus elevation procedures in the resorbed posterior maxilla. Comparison of the crestal and lateral approaches. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;85:8-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(98)90391-2
  21. Peleg M, Mazor Z, Garg AK. Augmentation grafting of the maxillary sinus and simultaneous implant placement in patients with 3 to 5 mm of residual alveolar bone height. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:549-56.
  22. Block MS, Kent JN. Sinus augmentation for dental implants: the use of autogenous bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55:1281-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90185-3
  23. Albrektsson T, Johansson C, Lundgren AK, Sul Y, Gottlow J. Experimental studies on oxidized implants. A histomorphometrical and biomechanical analysis. Appl Osseointegration Res 2000;1:21-4.
  24. Hall J, Lausmaa J. Properties of a new porous oxide surface on titanium implants. Applied Osseointegration Research 2000;1:5-8.
  25. Hurzeler MB, Kirsch A, Ackermann KL, Quinones 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;11:466-75.
  26. Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS, Iacono VJ. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13(Suppl):11-45.
  27. 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;24:565-77.
  28. Toffler M. Minimally invasive sinus floor elevation procedures for simultaneous and staged implant placement. N Y State Dent J 2004;70:38-44.
  29. O'Roark WL. Improving implant survival rates by using a new method of at risk analysis. Int J Oral Implantol 1991;8:31-57.
  30. Schmitt A, Zarb GA. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants for single-tooth replacement. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:197-202.