Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 39
  • /
  • Pages.2.1-2.6
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The factors that influence postoperative stability of the dental implants in posterior edentulous maxilla

  • Kim, Yun-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Choi, Na-Rae (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Deok (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • Received : 2016.10.24
  • Accepted : 2016.12.21
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: All clinicians are aware of the difficulty of installing a dental implant in posterior maxilla because of proximate position of maxillary sinus, insufficient bone width, and lower bone density. This study is to examine which factors will make the implantation in the posterior maxilla more difficult, and which factors will affect the postoperative implant stability in this region. Methods: Five hundred seventy-three fixtures on the maxilla posterior were included for this study from all the patients who underwent an installation of the dental implant fixture from January 2010 to December 2014 at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in Pusan National University Dental Hospital (Yangsan, Korea). The postoperative implant stability quotient (ISQ) value, fixture diameter and length, presence of either bone graft or sinus lift, and graft material were included in the reviewed factors. The width and height of the bone bed was assessed via preoperative cone beam CT image analysis. The postoperative ISQ value was taken just before loading by using the OsstellTM $mentor^{(R)}$ (Integration Diagnostics AB, Gothenburg, Sweden). The t test and ANOVA methods were used in the statistical analysis of the data. Results: Mean ISQ of all the included data was 79.22. Higher initial bone height, larger fixture diameter, and longer fixture length were factors that influence the implant stability on the posterior edentulous maxilla. On the other hand, the initial bone width, bone graft and sinus elevation procedure, graft material, and approach method for sinus elevation showed no significant impact associated with the implant stability on the posterior edentulous maxilla. Conclusions: It is recommended to install the fixtures accurately in a larger diameter and longer length by performing bone graft and sinus elevation.

Keywords

References

  1. Bassi A, Pioto R, Faverani L, Canestraro D, Fontao F (2015) Maxillary sinus lift without grafting, and simultaneous implant placement: a prospective clinical study with a 51-month follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44:902-907 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.03.016
  2. Morand M, Irinakis T (2007) The challenge of implant therapy in the posterior maxilla: providing a rationale for the use of short implants. J Oral Implantol 33:257-266 https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2007)33[257:TCOITI]2.0.CO;2
  3. Roos J, Sennerby L, Lekholm U, Jemt T, Grondahl K, Albrektsson T (1997) A qualitative and quantitative method for evaluating implant success: a 5-year retrospective analysis of the branemark implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 12:504-514.
  4. Jaffin RA, Berman CL (1991) The excessive loss of branemark fixtures in type iv bone: a 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 62:2-4 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1991.62.1.2
  5. Valderrama P, Oates TW, Jones AA, Simpson J, Schoolfield JD, Cochran DL (2007) Evaluation of two different resonance frequency devices to detect implant stability: a clinical trial. J Periodontol 78:262-272 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.060143
  6. Sennerby L, Meredith N (2008) Implant stability measurements using resonance frequency analysis: biological and biomechanical aspects and clinical implications. Periodontol 2000 47:51-66 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00267.x
  7. Nedir R, Bischof M, Szmukler-Moncler S, Bernard JP, Samson J (2004) Predicting osseointegration by means of implant primary stability. Clin Oral Implants Res 15:520-528 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01059.x
  8. Lemos CAA, Ferro-Alves ML, Okamoto R, Mendonca MR, Pellizzer EP (2016) Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 47:8-17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2016.01.005
  9. Pabst AM, Walter C, Ehbauer S, Zwiener I, Ziebart T, Al-Nawas B et al (2015) Analysis of implant-failure predictors in the posterior maxilla: a retrospective study of 1395 implants. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 43:414-420 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2015.01.004
  10. Thoma D, Zeltner M, Husler J, Hammerle C, Jung R (2015) Eao supplement working group 4-eao cc 2015 short implants versus sinus lifting with longer implants to restore the posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 26:154-169
  11. Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S (2000) Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol 5:22-31 https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2000.5.1.22
  12. Raviv E, Turcotte A, Harel-Raviv M (2010) Short dental implants in reduced alveolar bone height. Quintessence Int 41: 575-579.
  13. Haas R, Mensdorff-Pouilly N, Mailath G, Watzek G (1996) Survival of 1,920 IMZ implants followed for up to 100 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants;11
  14. Klein MO, Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B (2014) Systematic review on success of narrow-diameter dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29
  15. Mangano FG, Shibli JA, Sammons RL, Iaculli F, Piattelli A, Mangano C (2014) Short (8-mm) locking-taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior region: a prospective clinical study with 1- to 10-years of follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res 25:933-940 https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12181
  16. Oliveira R, El Hage M, Carrel J-P, Lombardi T, Bernard J-P (2012) Rehabilitation of the edentulous posterior maxilla after sinus floor elevation using deproteinized bovine bone: a 9-year clinical study. Implant Dent 21:422-426 https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3182691873
  17. Manso MC, Wassal T (2010) A 10-year longitudinal study of 160 implants simultaneously installed in severely atrophic posterior maxillas grafted with autogenous bone and a synthetic bioactive resorbable graft. Implant Dent 19:351-360 https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181e59d03
  18. Krennmair G, Waldenberger O (2004) Clinical analysis of wide-diameter frialit-2 implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19:710-715
  19. Javed F, Romanos GE (2015) Role of implant diameter on long-term survival of dental implants placed in posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 19:1-10 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1333-z
  20. Small PN, Tarnow DP (2000) Gingival recession around implants: a 1-year longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 15:527-532
  21. In YS, Park YW (2011) Factors affecting survival of maxillary sinus augmented implants. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 33:241-248
  22. Esposito M, Cannizzaro G, Soardi E, Pistilli R, Piattelli M, Corvino V, et al. (2012) Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 6 mm-long, 4 mm-wide implants or by longer implants in augmented bone. Preliminary results from a pilot randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 5:19-33
  23. Nkenke E, Stelzle F (2009) Clinical outcomes of sinus floor augmentation for implant placement using autogenous bone or bone substitutes: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 20:124-133 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01776.x
  24. Markovic A, Misic T, Calvo-Guirado JL, Delgado-Ruiz RA, Janjic B, Abboud M (2016) Two-center prospective, randomized, clinical, and radiographic study comparing osteotome sinus floor elevation with or without bone graft and simultaneous implant placement. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 18:873-882 https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12373
  25. Sverzut AT, Stabile GAV, de Moraes M, Mazzonetto R, Moreira RWF (2008) The influence of tobacco on early dental implant failure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:1004-1009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.01.032
  26. Zupnik J, S-w K, Ravens D, Karimbux N, Guze K (2011) Factors associated with dental implant survival: a 4-year retrospective analysis. J Periodontol 82:1390-1395 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2011.100685
  27. Wagenberg B, Froum SJ (2006) A retrospective study of 1,925 consecutively placed immediate implants from 1988 to 2004. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 21:71
  28. Moy PK, Medina D, Shetty V, Aghaloo TL (2005) Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 20:569-577
  29. Han S, Lee JH (2012) A retrospective clinical study of survival rate for a single implant in posterior teeth. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 34:186-199
  30. Conrad HJ, Jung J, Barczak M, Basu S, Seong W-J (2011) Retrospective cohort study of the predictors of implant failure in the posterior maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26:154-162

Cited by

  1. Bone regeneration is associated with the concentration of tumour necrosis factor-α induced by sericin released from a silk mat vol.7, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15687-w
  2. The rate and stability of mandibular block bone graft in recent 5 years vol.39, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-017-0118-0
  3. Comparison of Pixel Values of Maxillary Sinus Grafts and Adjacent Native Bone With Cone-Beam Computed Tomography vol.27, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/id.0000000000000823
  4. Porcine Bone Incorporated With 4-Hexylresorcinol Increases New Bone Formation by Suppression of the Nuclear Factor Kappa B Signaling Pathway vol.29, pp.7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000004517
  5. Stress Distribution on the Prosthetic Screws in the All-on-4 Concept: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis vol.46, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-19-00090
  6. Lateral Window Design for Maxillary Sinus Graft Based on the Implant Position vol.17, pp.17, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176335
  7. Factors Affecting Implant Stability Quotients at Immediately and Conventionally Loaded Implants in the Posterior Maxilla: A Split‐Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial vol.30, pp.7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13296