A Long-Term Study of Implants Supporting Overdentures as a Model for Implant Success
- Autores: Dr. Devorah Schwartz-Arad
- Localización: Journal of periodontology, ISSN 0022-3492, Vol. 76, Nº. 9, 2005, págs. 1431-1435
- Idioma: inglés
- Enlaces
-
Resumen
Background: Implant-supported overdentures have been a common treatment for edentulous patients for the past 20 years, achieving good clinical results. The purpose of this study was to examine survival and success rates of implants supporting overdentures in the maxilla and mandible and to examine the influence of factors related to patients, implant procedure, implant data, and follow-up period on implant success.
Methods: During a 10-year period (1990 to 2000), 285 implants were placed in 62 patients to support 69 overdentures (seven patients had overdentures in both jaws). Patients ranged in age from 45 to 85 years (mean 64.5 years). The files of 61 patients, including 277 implants supporting 68 overdentures (14 maxillary and 54 mandibular), had measurable radiographic post-exposure follow-up (range 6.63 to 110.93 months, mean 37.93 months) for cervical bone loss (CBL) measurements. Bone loss was measured by radiographic examination in which the mean number of exposed threads in mesial and distal sides of the implant was considered. Implants were rehabilitated by overdentures with bar (N = 52) or ball (N = 16) attachments.
Results: Implant survival rate was 96.1% (11/285 did not survive) and total 10-year cumulative survival rate was 95.4% (maxilla, 83.5%, mandible, 99.5%). The success rate was 70.4% (maxilla, 41.9%; mandible, 80.8%) when using Albrektsson et al. success criteria. A logistic regression analysis showed that the maxilla (P <0.0001) and a short follow-up period (up to 5 years) (P = 0.017) were the most influencing factors enhancing CBL.
Conclusions: 1) Survival of implants supporting overdentures was very high; 2) implants supporting overdentures in the maxilla had greater CBL than in the mandible; and 3) new criteria of implant success should be considered. J Periodontol 2005;76: 1431-1435.
