Loading…

15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla

There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Annals of anatomy 2019-03, Vol.222, p.88-93
Main Authors: Anitua, Eduardo, Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123
container_end_page 93
container_issue
container_start_page 88
container_title Annals of anatomy
container_volume 222
creator Anitua, Eduardo
Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.
description There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla) on these outcomes. A clinical retrospective study of short dental implants (≤8.5mm) was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. The secondary outcomes were the marginal bone loss, the prosthesis failures and the influence of anatomical location, the antagonist type, and the clinical/anatomical crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the marginal bone loss and implant success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients’ demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic variables. Kaplan–Meier method was used to assess the implant survival rate. Fifty patients with a mean age of 59±10years had a mean follow-up time of 15years. Seventy five implants were placed being 30 in the maxilla and 45 in the mandible. The implant position did not affect significantly the implant survival. The marginal bone loss has been significantly higher in the maxilla than the mandible. The implant survival rate was 93.3%. Short dental implants could be indicated to support fixed partial prosthesis in the mandible and the maxilla. Implant position may affect the marginal bone loss around the short dental implants.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.aanat.2018.11.003
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2135635458</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0940960218301456</els_id><sourcerecordid>2135635458</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtr3DAURkVoSSaPXxAIWnZjV2_bgS5KaNNCQjdNtkKWr4gG-RFJbjr_vppO2mVWlwvnu4-D0CUlNSVUfdzWxkwm14zQtqa0JoQfoQ1VtK2IIOwd2pBOkKpThJ2g05S2BVBSiWN0wokQrVBqg7ZUVjswEbs5hPmlWhc8O5ye5pjxAFM2AftxCWbKCZdiYcB-wvkJ8GJi9iaEHYY9uIZ5LYjJvjTX-N5Mg-8D4MeER_Pbh2DO0XtnQoKL13qGHr5--Xnzrbr7cfv95vNdZbnsciUb0bSNZNYZ4E0HA1fEQQ9tw1znukbQtlfKEpCMsLbpLR2E64njfCBOUsbP0IfD3CXOzyukrEefLJQLJig3aka5VFwK2RaUH1Ab55QiOL1EP5q405TovWS91X8l671kTakuDkvq6nXB2o8w_M_8s1qATwcAypu_PESdbNFS5PkINuth9m8u-APKao7g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2135635458</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Anitua, Eduardo ; Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Anitua, Eduardo ; Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><description>There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla) on these outcomes. A clinical retrospective study of short dental implants (≤8.5mm) was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. The secondary outcomes were the marginal bone loss, the prosthesis failures and the influence of anatomical location, the antagonist type, and the clinical/anatomical crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the marginal bone loss and implant success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients’ demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic variables. Kaplan–Meier method was used to assess the implant survival rate. Fifty patients with a mean age of 59±10years had a mean follow-up time of 15years. Seventy five implants were placed being 30 in the maxilla and 45 in the mandible. The implant position did not affect significantly the implant survival. The marginal bone loss has been significantly higher in the maxilla than the mandible. The implant survival rate was 93.3%. Short dental implants could be indicated to support fixed partial prosthesis in the mandible and the maxilla. Implant position may affect the marginal bone loss around the short dental implants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0940-9602</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1618-0402</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.aanat.2018.11.003</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30448466</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: Elsevier GmbH</publisher><subject>Bone type ; Implant survival ; Long-term ; Marginal bone loss ; Short implant</subject><ispartof>Annals of anatomy, 2019-03, Vol.222, p.88-93</ispartof><rights>2018</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier GmbH.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8386-5303 ; 0000-0003-4422-4527</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30448466$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Anitua, Eduardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><title>15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla</title><title>Annals of anatomy</title><addtitle>Ann Anat</addtitle><description>There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla) on these outcomes. A clinical retrospective study of short dental implants (≤8.5mm) was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. The secondary outcomes were the marginal bone loss, the prosthesis failures and the influence of anatomical location, the antagonist type, and the clinical/anatomical crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the marginal bone loss and implant success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients’ demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic variables. Kaplan–Meier method was used to assess the implant survival rate. Fifty patients with a mean age of 59±10years had a mean follow-up time of 15years. Seventy five implants were placed being 30 in the maxilla and 45 in the mandible. The implant position did not affect significantly the implant survival. The marginal bone loss has been significantly higher in the maxilla than the mandible. The implant survival rate was 93.3%. Short dental implants could be indicated to support fixed partial prosthesis in the mandible and the maxilla. Implant position may affect the marginal bone loss around the short dental implants.</description><subject>Bone type</subject><subject>Implant survival</subject><subject>Long-term</subject><subject>Marginal bone loss</subject><subject>Short implant</subject><issn>0940-9602</issn><issn>1618-0402</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kEtr3DAURkVoSSaPXxAIWnZjV2_bgS5KaNNCQjdNtkKWr4gG-RFJbjr_vppO2mVWlwvnu4-D0CUlNSVUfdzWxkwm14zQtqa0JoQfoQ1VtK2IIOwd2pBOkKpThJ2g05S2BVBSiWN0wokQrVBqg7ZUVjswEbs5hPmlWhc8O5ye5pjxAFM2AftxCWbKCZdiYcB-wvkJ8GJi9iaEHYY9uIZ5LYjJvjTX-N5Mg-8D4MeER_Pbh2DO0XtnQoKL13qGHr5--Xnzrbr7cfv95vNdZbnsciUb0bSNZNYZ4E0HA1fEQQ9tw1znukbQtlfKEpCMsLbpLR2E64njfCBOUsbP0IfD3CXOzyukrEefLJQLJig3aka5VFwK2RaUH1Ab55QiOL1EP5q405TovWS91X8l671kTakuDkvq6nXB2o8w_M_8s1qATwcAypu_PESdbNFS5PkINuth9m8u-APKao7g</recordid><startdate>20190301</startdate><enddate>20190301</enddate><creator>Anitua, Eduardo</creator><creator>Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</creator><general>Elsevier GmbH</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8386-5303</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4422-4527</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190301</creationdate><title>15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla</title><author>Anitua, Eduardo ; Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Bone type</topic><topic>Implant survival</topic><topic>Long-term</topic><topic>Marginal bone loss</topic><topic>Short implant</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Anitua, Eduardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of anatomy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Anitua, Eduardo</au><au>Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla</atitle><jtitle>Annals of anatomy</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Anat</addtitle><date>2019-03-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>222</volume><spage>88</spage><epage>93</epage><pages>88-93</pages><issn>0940-9602</issn><eissn>1618-0402</eissn><abstract>There is paucity of the studies that assess the outcomes of short dental implants with a follow-up time higher than 10years. This study aims to evaluate the long-term (15years) survival and marginal bone loss around short dental implants and assess the influence of the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla) on these outcomes. A clinical retrospective study of short dental implants (≤8.5mm) was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the anatomical location (mandible or maxilla). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. The secondary outcomes were the marginal bone loss, the prosthesis failures and the influence of anatomical location, the antagonist type, and the clinical/anatomical crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the marginal bone loss and implant success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients’ demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic variables. Kaplan–Meier method was used to assess the implant survival rate. Fifty patients with a mean age of 59±10years had a mean follow-up time of 15years. Seventy five implants were placed being 30 in the maxilla and 45 in the mandible. The implant position did not affect significantly the implant survival. The marginal bone loss has been significantly higher in the maxilla than the mandible. The implant survival rate was 93.3%. Short dental implants could be indicated to support fixed partial prosthesis in the mandible and the maxilla. Implant position may affect the marginal bone loss around the short dental implants.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>Elsevier GmbH</pub><pmid>30448466</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.aanat.2018.11.003</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8386-5303</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4422-4527</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0940-9602
ispartof Annals of anatomy, 2019-03, Vol.222, p.88-93
issn 0940-9602
1618-0402
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2135635458
source ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Bone type
Implant survival
Long-term
Marginal bone loss
Short implant
title 15-year follow-up of short dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Mandible Vs maxilla
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T23%3A06%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=15-year%20follow-up%20of%20short%20dental%20implants%20placed%20in%20the%20partially%20edentulous%20patient:%20Mandible%20Vs%20maxilla&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20anatomy&rft.au=Anitua,%20Eduardo&rft.date=2019-03-01&rft.volume=222&rft.spage=88&rft.epage=93&rft.pages=88-93&rft.issn=0940-9602&rft.eissn=1618-0402&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.aanat.2018.11.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2135635458%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-57478752cfae379ed360febe872f9f97418b66c0e520287bc1d4fb0f33d0f5123%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2135635458&rft_id=info:pmid/30448466&rfr_iscdi=true