Clinical Outcomes of Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses: A Retrospective Analysis Considering Patient-Related Factors.

Abstract

To investigate the clinical performance of implant-supported dental prostheses (ISDPs), this retrospective clinical study observed influencing factors on survival of the prostheses and necessary maintenance treatments during the observation time and complications of the dental implants. Patients who were provided either with fixed implant-supported dental prostheses (FISDPs) or telescopic-retained removable implant-supported dental prostheses (TR-RISDPs) were included in this retrospective clinical study. Potential influencing factors on the survival probability of the prostheses were observed using Kaplan-Meier analysis: patient sex, type of prosthesis, location, dentition in opposing arch, participation in follow-up visits, and whether the patient had a previous history of oral cancer. The type and number of maintenance treatments and complications of dental implants were also analyzed. A collective of 473 patients who were provided with either FISDPs (n = 320) or TR-RISDPs (n = 153) and 1,499 implants were included in the study. 6.6% of the prostheses (24 FISDPs and 7 TR-RISDPs) had to be replaced, and 6.3% of the implants (n = 45) were lost. The calculated 5-year survival probabilities were 87.4% for FISDPs and 95.5% for TR-RISDPs. FISDPs in patients who also had ISDPs in the opposing arch showed the lowest survival probabilities (P < .05). TR-RISDPs in patients who regularly attended follow-up visits showed the highest survival rates (P < .05). Maintenance treatments had to be performed at an earlier stage for patients with TR-RISDPs, and especially for TR-RISDPs located in the mandible (P < .05). FISDPs and TR-RISDPs showed good survival rates in this study. However, when planning FISDPs, the dentition in the opposing arch should be considered to prevent possible failure. TR-RISDPs indicate a higher need for aftercare measures, especially in the early years of function. Regular attendance of follow-up visits is still a decisive factor for success.