The survival of dental implants with different implant-abutment connection systems

Open access

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the survival of implants with different implant-abutment connection systems, in patients who had two kinds of implants implanted. In total, 240 implants were implanted - 91 implants with conical abutment Morse connection, and 149 with an internal hexagonal connection. During the follow-up period of 3 years and 10 months, the percentage of lost implants with a conical implant-abutment connection was 1.1%. Regarding the implants with hexagonal implant-abutment connection, this figure was 0.7%. Our work shows that there is a need for further research on the survival of dental implants. In this, the influence of other factors should be explored that are related both to the specific implant treatment, as well as to socio-demographic factors

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Chou C.T.S.: AICRG Part II: Crestal bone loss associated with the ANKYLOS implant: loading to 36 months. J. Oral Implantol. 30 134 2004.

  • 2. Döring K. Eisenmann E. Stiller M.: Functional and esthetic considerations for single-tooth ANKYLOS® implant-crowns: 8 years of clinical performance. J. Oral Implantol. 30 198 2004.

  • 3. Koszuta A. Szymańska J.: The level of patient satisfaction with implant treatment of missing teeth. Curr. Issues Pharm. Med. Sci. 25 243 2012.

  • 4. Levin L. et al.: Long-term marginal bone loss around single dental implants affected by current and past smoking habits. Implant Dent. 17 422 2008.

  • 5. Levin L. Sadet P. Grossmann Y.: A retrospective evaluation of 1387 single-tooth implants: a 6-year follow up. J. Periodontol. 77 2080 2006.

  • 6. Lin Y. et al.: A clinical retrospective study of 10 years of implant results. Chin. J. Stomatol. 41 131 2006.

  • 7. Machtei E.E. et al.: Dental implants for immediate fixed restoration of partially edentulous patients: a 1-year prospective pilot clinical trial in periodontally susceptible patients. J. Periodontol. 78 1188 2007.

  • 8. Maló P. Nobre M. Lopes A.: The rehabilitation of completely edentulous maxillae with different degrees of resorption with four or more immediately loaded implants: a 5-year retrospective study and a new classification. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 4 227 2011.

  • 9. Mertens C. et al: Use of 8-mm and 9-mm Implants in Atrophic Alveolar Ridges: 10-Year Results. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 27 1501 2012.

  • 10. Morris H.F. et al.: AICRG Part I: A 6-year multicentered multidisciplinary clinical study of a new and innovative implant design. J. Oral Implantol. 30 125 2004.

  • 11. Myśliwiec L. et al.: Leczenie implantoprotetyczne wrodzonego braku drugich siekaczy w szczęce. Implantoprotetyka 8 39 2007.

  • 12. Nentwig G-H.: The ANKYLOS® implant system: concept and clinical application. J. Oral Implantol. 30 171 2004.

  • 13. Rasouli Ghahroudi A.A.R. et al.: Radiographic vertical bone loss evaluation around dental implants following one year of functional loading. J. Dent. 7 89 2010.

  • 14. Schwartz-Arad D. et al.: Smoking and complications of endosseous dental implants. J. Periodontol. 73 153 2002.

  • 15. Stupka M.: Przykłady zastosowania wszczepów dentystycznych w różnych przypadkach braków zębowych. Część pierwsza - etap chirurgiczny. Implantoprotetyka 30 17 2008.

  • 16. Stupka M.: Przykłady zastosowania wszczepów dentystycznych w różnych przypadkach braków zębowych. Część druga - etap protetyczny. Implantoprotetyka 30 23 2008.

  • 17. Tandlich M. et al.: Removable prostheses may enhance marginal bone loss around dental implants: a long-term retrospective analysis. J. Periodontol. 78 2253 2007.

  • 18. Vandeweghe S. Bruyn H.: The effect of smoking on early bone remodelling on surface modified Southern Implants®. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 13 206 2011.

  • 19. Winkler S. Morris H.F. Ochi S.: Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann. Periodontol. 5 22 2000.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.32

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.154
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.285

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 333 223 21
PDF Downloads 184 127 3