Survival Rates and Factors Affecting the Outcome Following Immediate and Delayed Implant Placement: A Retrospective Study

被引:12
|
作者
Chatzopoulos, Georgios S. [1 ,2 ]
Wolff, Larry F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Sch Dent, Dept Dev & Surg Sci, Div Periodontol, 515 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Sch Dent, Dept Prevent Dent Periodontol & Implant Biol, Thessaloniki 54124, Greece
关键词
dental implants; fresh socket; healed socket; immediate implant; immediate insertion; implant failure rate; retrospective; DENTAL IMPLANTS; RISK-FACTORS; EXTRACTION SOCKETS; SINGLE-TOOTH; SYSTEMIC CONDITIONS; BONE; FAILURE; SITES; COMPLICATIONS; AUGMENTATION;
D O I
10.3390/jcm11154598
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Immediate implant placement into extraction sockets has become a widely acceptable treatment option to decrease treatment time and enhance esthetics. The objectives of this study were to assess and compare the survival rates of immediate and delayed implant treatment as well as to investigate the effect of patient- and site-related variables on the treatment outcome in a large-scale population-based study. Methods: Dental records of patients who received implant therapy were retrieved from the electronic records of the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry. Demographic characteristics, dental insurance status, socioeconomic status as well as medical history and tobacco use were recorded. The treatment outcome was included as a binary variable (survival/failure). Time to failure (date of procedure to date of visit with failure) was compared between immediate and delayed implant treatment in Cox regression models. Kaplan-Meier plots for the survival of both treatment modalities were created. Patient-sites without failure were censored at the last follow-up visit. Results: A total of 4519 records of implants were included. The sample mean age was 60.27 years and included 50.7% males and 12.9% tobacco users. High socioeconomic status was characterized for 82.3% of the included population and 63.0% of them were self-payers. Immediate implants were significantly more frequently placed in the maxillary arch (p < 0.001) than in the mandible. Tobacco users received more often a delayed rather than an immediate implant placement (p = 0.001). The survival rate analysis revealed there were no significant differences between immediate and delayed implant placements (p = 0.48). The mean follow-up time was 32.27 months during which 1.5% immediate and 1.1% delayed implants were removed. The estimated mean survival time for immediate implants was 68.90 months, while delayed implants placed in healed sockets showed a mean survival time of 75.11 months. A statistically significant association was found between gender (p = 0.03) and osteoporosis (p = 0.001) with treatment outcome. Conclusions: The placement of immediate implants achieved similarly high survival rates when compared to delayed implants placed in healed sites. Males and osteoporotic individuals showed significantly higher implant failure than females and non-osteoporotic patients. This study demonstrated that both immediate and delayed implant placements are sound options with predictable treatment outcome.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of immediate versus delayed implant placement in a failed implant site: A retrospective analysis of early implant survival
    Troiano, Giuseppe
    Luongo, Roberto
    Romano, Davide Cosimo
    Galli, Matthew
    Ravida, Andrea
    Wang, Hom-Lay
    Laino, Luigi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2021, 14 (01) : 67 - 76
  • [2] Are success and survival rates of early implant placement higher than immediate implant placement?
    Soydan, S. S.
    Cubuk, S.
    Oguz, Y.
    Uckan, S.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2013, 42 (04) : 511 - 515
  • [3] Dimensional Changes Following Immediate and Delayed Implant Placement: A Histomorphometric Study in the Canine
    Yi, Hee-Yong
    Park, Young-Seok
    Pippenger, Benjamin E.
    Lee, Bongho
    Miron, Richard J.
    Dard, Michel
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2017, 32 (03) : 541 - 546
  • [4] IMMEDIATE IMPLANT PLACEMENT INTO EXTRACTION SITES - A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
    SCHWARTZARAD, D
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1995, 74 (03) : 960 - 960
  • [5] Immediate implant placement with simultaneous bone augmentation versus delayed implant placement following alveolar ridge preservation: A clinical and radiographic study
    Al-Aroomi, Omar A.
    Sakran, Karim A.
    Al-Aroomi, Maged A.
    Mashrah, Mubarak A.
    Ashour, Sarraj H.
    Al-Attab, Reem
    Yin, Lihua
    JOURNAL OF STOMATOLOGY ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2023, 124 (01)
  • [6] Implant survival and patient satisfaction in completely edentulous patients with immediate placement of implants: a retrospective study
    Kim, Hye-Sung
    Cho, Han-A
    Kim, Young Youn
    Shin, Hosung
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2018, 18
  • [7] Implant survival and patient satisfaction in completely edentulous patients with immediate placement of implants: a retrospective study
    Hye-sung Kim
    Han-A Cho
    Young youn Kim
    Hosung Shin
    BMC Oral Health, 18
  • [8] Comparison of Crestal Bone Change Following Immediate and Delayed Placement of Dental Implant
    Ali, Marwah Safaa
    Atallah, Hawraa Noori
    Wahid, Maha Hatem Abdul
    Sami, Suha Mohammad
    JOURNAL OF POPULATION THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2023, 30 (02): : E145 - E154
  • [9] Comparison of Bone Healing in Immediate Implant Placement versus Delayed Implant Placement
    Singh, Gagandeep
    Pareek, Rajat
    Rajawat, Gaurav Singh
    Kadam, Aljeeta
    Al Abdulsalam, Mahmoud
    Al Abdulathim, Abdulrahman
    JOURNAL OF PHARMACY AND BIOALLIED SCIENCES, 2021, 13 (06): : S1309 - S1314
  • [10] A Prospective Randomized Clinical Study of Changes in Soft Tissue Position Following Immediate and Delayed Implant Placement
    van Kesteren, Christopher J.
    Schoolfield, John
    West, Jason
    Oates, Thomas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2010, 25 (03) : 562 - 570