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
  • [21] Severe osteomyelitis following immediate placement of a dental implant
    Kesting, Marco Rainer
    Thurmueller, Petra
    Ebsen, Michael
    Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich
    IMPLANTOLOGIE, 2008, 16 (01): : 61 - 67
  • [22] Influence of immediate/delayed implant placement and implant platform on the peri-implant bone formation
    Passoni, Bernardo B.
    Marques de Castro, Daniel S.
    de Araujo, Maria Angelica R.
    de Araujo, Carlos d. R. P.
    Piatelli, Adriano
    Benfatti, Cesar A. M.
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2016, 27 (11) : 1376 - 1383
  • [23] Immediate implant placement and provisionalization: Aesthetic outcome 1 year after implant placement. A prospective clinical multicenter study
    Groenendijk, Edith
    Staas, Tristan Ariaan
    Bronkhorst, Ewald
    Raghoebar, Gerry Max
    Meijer, Gert Jacobus
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (02) : 193 - 200
  • [24] - IMPLANT STABILITY COMPARISON OF IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED MAXILLARY IMPLANT PLACEMENT BY USE OF RESONANCE FREQUENCY ANALYSIS - A CLINICAL STUDY
    Granic, Marko
    Katanec, Davor
    Boras, Vanja Vucicevic
    Susic, Mato
    Juric, Ivona Bago
    Gabric, Dragana
    ACTA CLINICA CROATICA, 2015, 54 (01) : 3 - 8
  • [25] Delayed immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone with a two-piece ceramic implant
    Marquardt, Pascal
    Krueger-Janson, Lea
    IMPLANTOLOGIE, 2018, 26 (04): : 383 - 392
  • [26] Retrospective analysis of implant survival and the influence of periodontal disease and immediate placement on long-term results
    Evian, CI
    Emling, R
    Rosenberg, ES
    Waasdorp, JA
    Halpern, W
    Shah, S
    Garcia, M
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2004, 19 (03) : 393 - 398
  • [27] Variations in Soft and Hard Tissues following Immediate Implant Placement versus Delayed Implant Placement following Socket Preservation in the Maxillary Esthetic Region: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
    Santhanakrishnan, Muthukumar
    Ramesh, Nithyakalyani
    Kamaleeshwari, R.
    Subramanian, Vedavalli
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 2021
  • [28] Clinical evaluation of implant survival based on size and site of placement: A retrospective study of immediate implants at single rooted teeth sites
    Ramalingam, Sundar
    Al-Hindi, Maryam
    Al-Eid, Raniah Abdullah
    Nooh, Nasser
    SAUDI DENTAL JOURNAL, 2015, 27 (02) : 105 - 111
  • [29] Study on Overdenture of Immediate Implant Placement and Function
    Luo, Shenglei
    Fu, Chengyan
    Wei, Hengli
    Zhao, Bo
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2023, 34 (02) : E134 - E138
  • [30] Peri-Implant Infection Three Years Following Immediate Implant Placement
    Chen, S.
    IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN POST-EXTRACTION SITES: TREATMENT OPTIONS, VOL 3, 2008, 3 : 173 - 178