Implant Survival Rate Research Articles

Early radiographic evaluation of an anatomic porous tantalum tibia: A prospective, multi-center, non-randomized clinical study.

Excellent survival rates have been reported for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed with cementless porous metal tibial components. More data, however, is necessary to assess the survival and radiographic results of modular implants with anatomic designs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the early radiographic, survival, and clinical outcomes of a cementless tantalum metal tibial implant with a modular anatomic component. An early follow-up of a prospective, multi-center, non-randomized outcomes study of patients who received cementless tibial implants in primary TKA between 2018 and 2020 was performed. A total of 148 implants were available for review. Radiographs, the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), patient satisfaction, and adverse events were collected for at least two-years post-operative. A minimum of two-years follow-up was available for 119 patients and evaluated for progressive radiolucent lines (RLLs). The mean follow-up was 2.2±0.6years, and the two-year implant survival rate was 98.59% (95% C.I.: 94.46, 99.64) with no aseptic revisions during the follow-up period. Progressive tibial RLLs were present in 3.4% of patients at two-years follow-up, but were all less than 2mm with all combined RLLs less than 4mm. The FJS-12 and OKS all significantly (p<0.0001) increased and exceeded their respective minimal clinical important differences, and 93% of patients were satisfied at two-years follow-up. This study supports excellent survivorship, clinical and patient reported outcomes using cementless, fixed bearing TKA with minimal complications at early follow-up. Further follow-up is necessary to confirm the sustainability of the clinical outcomes and to evaluate mid- to long-term survivorship.

Dental implants in solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

It remains to be determined whether dental implantation treatment in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and non-organ transplant patients yields similar clinical outcomes. This review summarizes related data for existing cases and presents a meta-analysis of the outcomes of dental implants in SOT recipients and non-organ transplant patients. An electronic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases covering articles published from inception to December 2024. This study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and was designed based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study design (PICOS) framework. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The certainty of findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model to estimate the combined performance measures and 95% confidence intervals for the implant survival rate, marginal bone loss (MBL), and probing depth (PD). A total of 12 articles were included in the systematic review. The implant survival rate of 290 implants in 110 SOT recipients was 99.3%. The meta-analysis of four case-control studies revealed no significant differences in the implant survival rate and PD between SOT recipients and non-organ transplant patients (P=0.45 and P=0.49, respectively), while there was slightly less MBL in SOT recipients (P=0.02), possibly caused by confounding factors and bias. Organ transplantation does not impair implant survival in the short and mid-long term. Dental implantation can serve as a treatment option for tooth loss in SOT recipients.

The influence of the gingival phenotype on implant survival rate and clinical parameters: a systematic review.

The goal of this systematic review was to verify whether the gingival phenotype (thick or thin) could impact the dental implant survival rate by affecting the marginal bone. The search was carried out on PubMed/MedLine, PubMed Central, and B-On databases. The research question was: "Does gingival phenotype positively or negatively influence marginal bone loss around dental implants?" The inclusion criteria were: any clinical trial/study, comparative study, prospective or retrospective articles, systematic review that addressed at least a 1-year follow-up with an assessment of the marginal bone loss (MBL) around dental implants, articles that reported the gingival phenotype (thin or thick) and were published in the last 13 years. The exclusion criteria were narrative or other reviews, letters to the editor, and commentaries. Data extraction included the author's name, year of publication, type of study, sample size, number of implants, method used, and outcomes presented. The extracted data was summarized and presented in the results section. Critical Appraisal tool in JBI Systematic Reviews was used to determine the possibility of bias. A total of 62 articles were found, but eight articles were relevant to compose this study. After deep evaluation, it was possible to observe the implant success rate for both gingival phenotypes, thin and thick, was greater than 91% within a follow-up of up to 5 years. Therefore, it is unclear whether the thickness of the gingival tissue surrounding the implant can directly influence the marginal bone level. The gingival phenotype may be indirectly involved in the survival rate of dental implants, as it can be a risk factor for peri-implantitis, leading to marginal bone loss beyond what is expected. The thin gingival phenotype is one of the main risk factors for additional bone loss. It is crucial to know how to preserve the healthy condition. Within the results found, the gingival phenotype is indirectly related to implant survival rate and clinical parameters, which were respectively high and non-conclusive. Therefore, a higher risk of peri-implantitis is suggested when a thin phenotype is present.

Second chances for smiles: a systematic review of implants in failed sites.

It has been proven that implants are predictable substitutes for replacing teeth. However, the effectiveness and survival of implants placed in sites previously affected by failure, as well as the optimal treatment strategies, remain poorly defined. This systematic review aimed to evaluate implant survival and peri-implant health in such cases, focusing on comparing immediate versus delayed implant placement and the role of augmentation. Four electronic databases were systematically searched, and meta-analyses were conducted with subgroup analyses (PROSPERO CRD42024548610). Of 1,798 records identified, 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The 1-year survival rate for implants placed as replacements was 96.7% (95% CI: 92.8-99.3%). No significant differences were found between immediate and delayed placement (P = 0.31), or between immediate and delayed augmentation (P = 0.85). Although implants with immediate augmentation showed a higher survival rate (97.6%, 95% CI: 93.4-99.9%) compared to those with delayed augmentation (91.7%, 95% CI: 83.4-97.5%), this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.26). Peri-implant health outcomes, including marginal bone loss, were consistent across subgroups. Replacing failed implants is often an attractive treatment option. While implants placed as replacements generally have lower survival rates compared to primary implants, immediate implant placement remains a viable option when adequate bone volume is present. The review supports the effectiveness of implant re-placement, with generally favourable. Dental implants are widely used for replacing missing teeth, but implant failure is a known complication. Understanding the outcomes of implants placed in sites where implants have failed is important as this situation can present challenges, such as insufficient bone or altered soft tissue conditions. This article provides data on the survival and health outcomes of implants placed in these failed sites, which may provide benefit to clinicians in these scenarios.

Accuracy, Safety, and Efficiency in Robotic-Assisted vs. Freehand Dental Implant Surgery: A 6-Month Follow-Up Randomized Controlled Trial.

To assess the implant accuracy, safety, and efficiency between robotic-assisted and freehand dental implant placement with a half-year follow-up. Patients requiring single-tooth implant restorations were recruited and randomized into two groups: robotic-assisted surgery and freehand implant surgery. The accuracy of implant positioning was compared by assessing immediate postoperative CBCT scans against preoperative planning software. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded, and data were analyzed using an intention-to-treat approach. The time required for implant placement in each group was documented. A 6-month follow-up measured the implant survival rates. The study included 24 patients (median age 36, 18 female). In the robotic-assisted surgery group, the average platform global deviation, apex global deviation, and angular deviation were 0.70 ± 0.11 mm, 0.70 ± 0.12 mm, and 1.09° ± 0.67°, respectively. In the freehand implant surgery group, these measures were 1.24 ± 0.59 mm, 2.13 ± 1.26 mm, and 7.43° ± 6.12°, respectively, with statistically significant differences. Regarding the duration of surgery, the robotic-assisted surgery group required 18.8 ± 4.89 min. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were similar across both groups, and the implant survival rate was 100% in both groups at the 6-month follow-up. This study found that robot-assisted implant placement offers higher accuracy in implant positioning compared to freehand placement, while requiring longer operation times. Future developments should focus on simplifying the registration and design of robot systems to enhance efficiency and facilitate their broader clinical adoption.

Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration: L-PRF Bone-Block Vs A Mixture of Autogenous Bone with Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral. A Split-Mouth RCT Study with 25 Months Follow-Up.

This study aims to assess the differences between a leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block and a combination of 50% autogenous bone (AB) and 50% deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) as grafting material for horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR). This randomized double-blind split-mouth clinical trial included 13 subjects requiring bilateral horizontal bone augmentation. Each patient received both treatment modalities: one side of the jaw was treated by GBR with the L-PRF and deproteinized bovine bone mineral block, and the other side with a 50/50 mixture of AB and DBBM. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate horizontal bone width (HBW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) at various time points: baseline (T0), immediately post-augmentation (T1), at implant placement (T2), and one year after abutment connection (T4). Bone sounding (BS) was also used to verify CBCT measurements. No statistically significant differences were found in HBW gain between test (L-PRF) and control (AB/DBBM) sites at any timepoint. Both sites showed significant HBW loss post-implant placement, with more bone volume lost at higher crestal levels (Sh0 > Sh2 > Sh4). At the Sh2 level, 48.8% of the HBW gain at T1 was lost by T4 in test sites, and 46.2% in control sites. Similarly, BBT at Sh2 reduced from 4.7 ± 1.0 mm to 1.3 ± 1.5 mm in test sites and from 2.1 ± 1.0 mm to 0.9 ± 0.8 mm in control sites. Both groups of sites had one complication, resulting in a 91.6% success rate for both treatments. The cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% at 16 months, with a mean interproximal bone level (IBL) loss of 0.2 ± 0.9 mm and 0.1 ± 0.6 mm for test and control sites, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the AB/DBBM composite graft and the L-PRF and bovine bone mineral block for horizontal GBR. Significant resorption of grafted volume occurs within 25 months, continuing post-implant placement. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings and optimize GBR techniques.

Can monolithic zirconia frameworks in implant-supported cross-arch prostheses deliver reliable long-term outcomes?

A retrospective cohort study assessing the mid-to-long-term outcomes and risk factors affecting the prosthetic success and survival of implant-supported cross-arch fixed dental prostheses (IFCDPs) with monolithic zirconia frameworks. Forty-seven patients received a total of 51 cross-arch prostheses (27 maxillary and 24 mandibular prostheses), supported by 302 implants. Comprehensive clinical and radiographic records were available over a follow-up period ranging from 5 to 13 years. A strict inclusion criteria ensured the use of screw-retained implants and monolithic zirconia frameworks fabricated using standardised CAD/CAM protocols, without cemented titanium bases. Exclusion criteria included systemic conditions affecting healing, bruxism, uncontrolled periodontitis, smoking, and significant health changes during the follow-up period. Descriptive statistics summarised implant and prosthesis outcomes, while complications were evaluated for peri-implantitis at an implant level and framework fractures at a prosthesis level. Peri-implantitis was identified through clinical signs, including bleeding on probing, suppuration, and radiographic evidence of bone loss. Prosthetic outcomes were classified using the modified USPHS criteria. Mixed-effects Cox regression models were applied to analyse risk factors. Hazard ratios were calculated for peri-implantitis and framework fractures, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The implant survival rate was 97.64%, with peri-implantitis observed in 27 implants, predominantly in the mandible, resulting in an overall implant success rate of 91.06%. Prosthesis survival was 82.35%, with nine framework fractures reported, eight of which occurred in mandibular prostheses. The mandible was identified as a significant risk factor for both framework fractures (HR = 11.64, p = 0.024) and peri-implantitis (HR = 10.88, p = 0.003). IFCDPs with monolithic zirconia-based frameworks exhibited favourable clinical outcomes over a 5-13-year period. However, mandibular prostheses were more prone to framework fractures and peri-implantitis, highlighting the need to consider mandibular flexure in prosthetic design to enhance long-term success and durability.

Breast implant rupture: removal and re-implantation: a dual case report

Breast implant surgery is now among the top five plastic surgeries done for cosmetic purpose globally. Silicone implants are the most common type of implants used whereas saline implants are used by very few. In the long run, rupture of the breast implant is a complication of these kind of surgeries. As per one study, over a period of 3-20 years, the silicone implants are likely to rupture. After three years of the breast implant surgery, it has been estimated that the survival rate for the silicone breast implants is around 83-85%. Some implant ruptures are silent or asymptomatic. Early diagnosis by routine ultrasonography is essential to manage the ruptures early. There is very less amount of information available related to breast implant rupture. Here, we present a dual case report related to breast implant rupture one saline and one silicone.

Five-Year Results of One-Piece Zirconia Oral Implants Supporting Three-Unit Fixed Dental Prostheses.

The purpose of the present prospective case series was to investigate the clinical and radiological outcome of one-piece zirconia implants fabricated from 3Y-TZP with a moderately roughened endosseous surface (Sa = 1.24 μm) to support three-unit fixed dental prostheses (FDP) after five years in function. Twenty-seven patients received a total of 54 implants in a one-stage surgery with immediate provisionalization. Peri-implant bone loss was assessed using standardized radiographs. Additionally, soft-tissue parameters were analyzed. Statistical analyses were conducted using linear mixed regression models and Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests (p < 0.05). All patients participated in an annual maintenance program. Eighteen implants were lost up to the 5-year follow-up, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 66.67%. The mean marginal bone loss of the remaining implants amounted to 1.89 mm. Probing depth, clinical attachment loss, and bleeding on probing increased from prosthesis insertion to the 5-year follow-up, while the plaque index showed no significant changes during the same period. The investigated one-piece zirconia implant showed low survival rates as compared to previously reported survival rates of one-piece zirconia or two-piece titanium implants. Implant failure was attributed to peri-implantitis, leading to the necessity of implant removal. The implant is not commercially available.

Effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications on implant survival: a long-term retrospective cohort study

PurposeThis large-scale retrospective study aimed to examine the long-term effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications intake on dental implant treatment outcome.Materials and methodsThis study retrospectively examined data from patients who underwent dental implant procedures at several university dental clinics within the BigMouth network between 2011 and 2022. Patients’ characteristics including age, gender, ethnicity, race, tobacco use, systemic medical conditions and intake of antiplatelets and anticoagulants were analyzed. Implant treatment outcome was the main outcome variable. Implant failure was defined as the removal of a dental implant for any reason. Time to failure (date of procedure to date of visit with failure) was recorded, while sites without a failure were censored at the last follow-up visit.ResultsA total of 50,333 dental implants in 20,842 patients over 12 years were analyzed and an implant failure rate of 1.4% at the implant level and 2.7% at the patient level were found. Asians, African-Americans, American Indians or Alaskan Natives, and White individuals were significantly more likely to receive antiplatelet medications than Hispanics or Latinos. Males and smokers exhibited significantly higher odds of being antiplatelet and anticoagulant users compared to females and non-smokers, respectively. When the implant survival rates between antiplatelet and anticoagulant users were compared to non-users, no significant differences were observed.ConclusionWithin the limitations of this study, it appears that the use of anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications does not affect the risk of implant failure. Both anticoagulant and antiplatelet users and non-users exhibit similar high implant survival rates.

Clinical outcomes of conversion prosthesis in immediately loaded implants: A retrospective study.

The primary objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of immediately loaded acrylic resin complete arch fixed implant-supported prosthesis (CAFIP) fabricated from the denture conversion protocol. The secondary objective was to evaluate the early implant survival outcomes associated with these prostheses. A retrospective chart review was conducted to study the clinical outcomes data of immediately loaded conversion prostheses and immediately loaded implants. All patients who had been treated with immediately loaded acrylic resin CAFIP using the denture conversion protocol over a 9-year period were included in the study. All dentures were fabricated by conventional processing using compression molded or injection molded techniques. These patients were treated by numerous clinicians but adhering to the same protocol, over the entire 9-year follow-up period. Clinical outcome data related to the number of early fractures during the initial implant healing period of 4 months, early implant failures, late fractures (after 4 months), late implant failures (after 4 months), technical complications, number and type of implants placed, the arch in which the implants and prosthesis were placed and the type of opposing dentition were recorded and analyzed. A p-value<0.05 was determined to be statistically significant. A total of 153 prostheses (97 in maxilla, 56 in mandible) in 117 patients (60 males, 57 females) and 768 implants (298 in maxilla, 470 in mandible) were evaluated. All conversion prostheses were followed up for a minimum of 4 months (range of 4-20 months). There were a total of 15 implant failures yielding a survival rate of 98% survival rate during the observation period with the conversion prostheses. Only 3 of the failed implants were associated with a failure (crack or fracture) of the conversion prosthesis (maxilla) during the 4-month healing period. There were a total of 9 conversion prostheses with cracks or fractures during the 4-month healing period (early critical complication), yielding a complication-free survival rate of 94.1%. There were 6 additional early noncritical prosthetic complications such as tooth debonding or chipping during the 4-month period. Only the early critical prosthetic complication rates comparing maxilla and mandible were statistically significant (p=0.037). The findings from this retrospective study revealed a high early survival rate for dental implants (98%) and for the immediately loaded acrylic resin CAFIP fabricated from the denture conversion protocol (94%). There were minimal additional implant failures and noncritical complications related to the conversion prosthesis. The denture conversion protocol is a simple evidence-based technique and serves as an excellent and predictable method for the immediate loading of dental implants.

Identification of Alterations in the Expression of Genes Related to the Implant Failure in Spanish Patients with Down Syndrome and Periodontal Disease

Background: Individuals with Down syndrome exhibit a higher prevalence of periodontal disease, which can lead to implant loss. This study aims to identify genetic markers associated with implant loss in these patients, providing insight into potential predictive and therapeutic approaches. Methods: A systematic analysis was conducted, including both clinical and genetic data from Down syndrome patients with a history of dental implants. Genetic profiling was performed using Transcriptome Analysis Console (TAC version 4.0 Applied BiosystemsTM, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), focusing on genes previously implicated in periodontal disease and bone metabolism. Statistical analysis identified correlations between genetic variants and implant survival rates. Results: The analysis revealed statistically significant alterations in several genes related to inflammation and bone remodeling. Key findings included alterations in the expression of the genes MMP15, MMP17, S100B, GHR, DNAH6, and ZCCHC14 in patients with implant failure. These genetic markers were strongly correlated with compromised osseointegration and implant loss. These findings underline the role of genetic predisposition in the failure of dental implants among individuals with Down syndrome. Conclusions: Genetic markers, particularly those involved in inflammation and bone metabolism, play a critical role in implant loss among Down syndrome patients with periodontal disease. Recognizing these markers can aid in early diagnosis and personalized treatment strategies, potentially improving implant success rates.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) in the posterior atrophic jaws: a retrospective cohort study

ObjectiveThis study aimed at investigating implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) around extra-short implants. The impact of the loading protocol and of the use of an intermediate abutment was also evaluated, to explore possible differences in terms of the outcome measures.Materials and methodsPatients with single or multiple mandibular or maxillary posterior edentulism rehabilitated using extra-short 5–6 mm long implants were included. Different prosthetic protocols were used. Clinical and radiological follow-up was 5 years. The outcomes measures were implant survival and MBL.ResultsThe analysis included 56 implants placed in 34 adults (12 males and 22 females; mean age 60 years, SD 11). Six implants failed during a median follow-up of 5 years and 4 of them were recorded in one patient at 2-year follow-up. The 5-year implant survival was 89% overall (87% in conventional and 94% in immediate loading). At univariate analysis, during follow-up immediate loading was associated with higher MBL (mean variation 0.21 mm, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.40; p = 0.02), while intermediate abutment was associated with lower MBL (mean variation -0.23 mm, 95%CI -0.39 to -0.09; p = 0.003). Multivariable analysis confirmed that immediate loading was associated with higher MBL.ConclusionWithin its limitations, this study showed that extra-short implants under immediate loading conditions can be a reliable solution. The application of horizontal and vertical platform switching with the use of intermediate abutments seems to be able to contribute to the reduction of MBL.Graphical

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Single-Unit Implant- Supported Restorations: A 12-Month Cross-Sectional Clinical Study.

This retrospective clinical study aims to analyze single-unit implant-supported restorations' clinical and radiographic outcomes comprehensively. In this retrospective study, patients who had undergone 12 months of implant-supported singleunit fixed prosthetic treatment were scanned from the archives, and a hundred patients were included in the study. Implant success and survival rates were assessed according to the consensus decisions published at the International Oral Implantology Congress in 2007. Prosthetic complications such as chipping, screw loosening, and decementation were also evaluated. In addition, success/survival rates and prosthetic compositions were associated with some surgical and prosthetic parameters. According to the success/survival criteria, 88% of the implants were successful, 10% had satisfactory survival, and 2% had compromised survival. The risk of satisfactory or compromised survival was 62.5 times higher in individuals with inadequately keratinized mucosa compared to those with adequately keratinized mucosa (p < 0.001). It was also 5.736 times greater for extractions due to periodontal disease versus endodontic reasons (p = 0.010) and 4.629 times higher for implants with diameters less than 3.75 mm compared to those between 3.75 mm and 5 mm (p = 0.037). Screw loosening was observed in 15% of the evaluated restorations, decementation in 13% and chipping in 4%, and the risk of screw loosening was 4.444 times higher for screw retention abutments compared to standard abutments (p=0.015). Insufficient keratinized mucosa, periodontal problems leading to tooth extractions, and the use of narrowdiameter implants can negatively affect the success of implant procedures. Loosening in screw-retained restorations is due solely to screw loosening, which is a high risk for screwretained restorations. Loosening in cement-retained restorations, on the other hand, is caused by the decementation of the prosthetic restoration or loosening of the abutment screw supporting the restoration.

Effects of High Insertion Torques (≥75 Ncm) on Secondary Stability of Implants Placed According to the “All-on-Four Concept”: A 2-Year Clinical Prospective Controlled Case Series Study

Background/Objectives: Primary stability is an important factor for dental implant success, and a high insertion torque (IT) is recommended in cases where an immediate load is required or desired. At the same time, some authors have claimed that it can interfere with bone-to-implant healing. This study aimed to compare the survival rates of implants inserted with different torques in full-arch cases, with or without immediate load, with up to 2-year follow-up. Methods: This study included subjects who required full-arch rehabilitation with implants. All cases were planned for the placement of four implants on each arch and were divided into groups according to the IT and had implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements taken periodically for up to 2 years. Results: No implant was lost during this period, and no significant differences in peri-implant bone loss were observed. The paired t-test was performed to determine the association between ISQ and IT. Conclusions: The results suggest that initial torques higher than 75 Ncm may not be harmful to the stability of implants placed for full-arch rehabilitation, at least during the study period. Further clinical studies with longer follow-up periods are necessary to confirm these results.

The Effect of Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders (OPMD) on Dental Implants Survival-A Systematic Review.

Objectives: This research is purposed to synthesize the existing evidence on implant survival rates in patients with oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMD) and assess potential risk factors associated with peri-implant disease. Material and Methods: A comprehensive search was performed across PubMed MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, including studies published between 2012 and 2023. Results: The review of studies related to oral lichen planus (OLP) revealed an implant survival rate of 99.3% (50% to 100%) with a mean follow-up of 40.1 months. One retrospective study focused on patients with leukoplakia and erythroplakia, but did not provide data on implant survival; however, it reported the presence of oral squamous cell carcinomas (OSCC) in the vicinity of dental implants. Data from a patient with proliferative verrucous leukoplakia (PVL) indicated a 100% implant survival rate, while patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) showed an implant survival rate of 97.67%. For all other entities of OPMD no articles could be found. Conclusions: With the exception of OLP, there is a limited number of studies or none on all other entities of OPMD. The available literature indicates no impact of OLP on implant survival rates and does not support OLP as a risk factor for peri-implant disease. For the other entities of OPMD, no conclusion regarding implant survival or peri-implant disease risk factors can be drawn due to a lack of studies. To validate the results and evaluate OPMD on peri-implant tissue, large-scale prospective studies for all types of OPMD, especially for leukoplakia and erythroplakia, are needed.

Bone expansion as a horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Bone expansion is one of the quickest, simplest, and most reliable methods of alveolar ridge augmentation for implant placement. This systematic review is designed to investigate the outcomes of the bone expansion technique for horizontal ridge augmentation. The protocol of study has been prospectively registered into PROSPERO (CRD42023414686). Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched. Human original articles utilizing different bone expansion procedures for horizontal ridge augmentation without the use of bone materials or combined with vertical ridge augmentation techniques were included in the study. Qualitative and quantitative synthesis have been conducted. I-squared was used to assess heterogeneity. Meta-regression, forest plots random-effect model, and weighted mean difference were used for analysis. Leave-one-out influence analysis for finding outliers. Egger's publication bias test and Funnel plots were used to address publication bias. 3291 records were identified. Ten articles were included in this study after screening. The survival and complication rates of implants placed simultaneously with bone expansion was 100% 100% (95% CI: 99-100%) and 0% (95% CI: 0-1%), respectively. The meta-regression revealed that by each month passing from the implant placement the survival probability would be decreased significantly by 0.08% (95% CI: 0.009-0.15%; P = 0.03). The weighted mean ridge width difference before and after the osseodensification was 1.55mm (95% CI: 0.92-2.17mm). Based on the study's limitations it can be concluded that the bone expansion procedure can be considered an efficient and safe method regarding the survival and complication rates of placed implants. N/A.

Long-Term Effects of Sinus Floor Elevation with and Without Bone Graft: A Systematic Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Background and Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to assess clinical trials on the efficiency of sinus lift techniques with and without bone grafting in the atrophic posterior maxilla. Materials and Methods: This article was written under the PRISMA and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were electronically searched until December 2023. The risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane Risk of Bias tool guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed for implant survival rate (ISR), marginal bone loss (MBL), and endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG). Results: At the end of the electronic search, 5 clinical trials were considered eligible. Statistical analysis was achieved for osteotome sinus floor elevation. The ISR at 3 years had a risk ratio (RR) of 0.98 [0.90, 1.07] (CI 95%), p = 0.7, and at 5 years, RR 1.02 [0.93, 1.11] (CI 95%), p = 0.68. The MBL, at 3 years, indicated a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.01 [-0.15, 0.16] (CI 95%), p = 0.93, and at 5 years, WMD of -0.08 [-0.53, 0.37] (CI 95%), p = 0.73. ESBG at 3 years had a WMD of -0.44 [-1.05, 0.17] (CI 95%), p = 0.16, and at 5 years, WMD of -0.61 [-1.63, 0.41] (CI 95%), p = 0.24. Conclusions: The available evidence underlines that the osteotome sinus floor elevation technique without bone graft may be used.

Osteoporosis' effects on dental implants osseointegration and survival rate: a systematic review of clinical studies.

The goal of this systematic review was to critically appraise the existing evidence evaluating osteoporosis' effects on dental implant osseointegration and survival rate. A search was conducted in two databases, PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus, until October 2024, using the keywords 'osteoporosis,' 'osteopenia,' 'osseointegration,' and 'dental implants'. The inclusion criteria were clinical studies that evaluated the implant placement, complications, and osseointegration results in patients with osteoporosis; literature reviews and clinical studies addressing the outcome were considered; and articles written in English and published since 2000. Descriptive data analysis included author, year of publication, study design, number of patients, osteoporosis assessment, follow-up, and main findings. JBI quality assessment was performed. 24 articles were included with a total of 2,102 patients; 5954 dental implants were considered and evaluated. Most studies evaluated bone density for osteoporosis by dual-energy x-ray technology. The follow-up ranged from 1 month to 25 years. Four studies evaluated implants with over 10 years of follow-up. All studies' survival rate was higher than 90%, even for osteoporotic patients. Most studies indicated no differences between osteoporotic and healthy patients regarding marginal bone loss (MBL), bone-to-implant contact, cytokine levels, and mineral bone density. A prospective cohort study found a small MBL (-0.34 mm) in osteoporotic female patients, but there was insufficient evidence to prove any causal relationship between MBL and osteoporosis. Another study showed no clinical differences between implants placed in osteoporotic and healthy individuals. In contrast, other studies showed lower stability scores for implants placed in osteoporotic sites and a higher risk of failure for implant placement. Osteoporosis status was not a risk factor for dental implant failure, which was also confirmed by histological studies. Three studies had a medium risk of bias and 21 a low risk. Osteoporosis is not a contraindication for dental implant placement. Osseointegration in patients with osteoporosis is feasible; however, planning must be cautious and personalized for the installation of dental implants.

Ten-Year Implant Survivorship and Performance of Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Patients with the Zimmer Biomet Comprehensive® Shoulder System - a Short Stemmed Humeral Implant and Hybrid Glenoid.

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty are highly successful procedures for treatment of glenohumeral arthritis to reduce pain, improve range of motion, and overall quality of life. However, the long-term survivorship of the implant systems is less widely documented in the existing literature. The purpose of this study was to establish the long-term patient outcomes and identify factors influencing the postoperative implant survivorship of total anatomic shoulder arthroplasty devices/procedures utilizing the short-stemmed prosthesis and hybrid glenoid components of the Comprehensive Shoulder System (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) at an average of ten years. Between 2007 and 2015, 159 shoulders in 128 unique patients were sequentially enrolled in the prospective, observational study following their anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty utilizing the Zimmer Biomet Comprehensive Shoulder System with the Mini Stem component and Modular Hybrid Glenoid component variation. Enrolled patients were clinically evaluated on an annual basis following their operation for up to ten years including a physical exam, radiographic evaluation, and patient outcomes via a modified Constant Score and satisfaction. The implant survival rate was 98.1% at ten years. The mean patient age was 70.4± 8.3 years (Range: 50.7-90.3 years) at the time of surgery. Average Constant Scores improved from preoperative to 6 months postoperative with an average of 81.55 ± 16.10 and 84.09 ± 15.12, respectively however there was a statistically significant longitudinal decline in Constant Score with increasing age for an average loss of 0.5 points per year. The overall revision rate for this cohort was 1.26% for a total of two revision cases secondary to external trauma and not implant system related. Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with the Comprehensive Shoulder System had a high survivorship rate at the ten-year follow-up with improved clinical results postoperative. Patients had comparable long-term clinical results to the current longitudinal literature regarding survivorship of other implant systems.