Survival Rate Of Dental Implants Research Articles

The effectiveness of dental implantation in patients with type II diabetes mellitus

The issue of the safety of dental implants in patients with diabetes mellitus, despite the increase in the number of orthopedic corrections of partial or complete adentia with their use, remains open [1].
 In such a situation, the most urgent question is the development of new, safe and less traumatic methods of dental implantation, which would expand the indications for prosthetics on implants for this category of persons and improve the quality of life of such patients through full-fledged correction of chewing function.
 The purpose of the study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of the method of orthopedic rehabilitation proposed by the authors using implants in patients with type II diabetes mellitus.
 Material and methods. As part of the study, 68 patients were treated, who were divided into three groups: the main group (patients with DM operated without the formation of muco-periosteal flaps according to the protocol developed by us) — 34 patients (50 %); control group 1 (patients with DM operated according to the traditional protocol with the formation of muco-periosteal flaps) — 16 patients (24 %); control group 2 patients without diabetes, operated without formation of muco-periosteal flaps according to the protocol developed by us) — 18 patients (26 %).
 The effectiveness of dental implantation was evaluated after 2 years. Such indicators as the survival rate of dental implants and the level of bone resorption (according to the results of intraoral radiography were used as criteria. In addition, bone density was studied on the Hounsfield scale (HU).
 Results. It was found that in patients of the main group and control group 2, survival rates were 98.70 % and 98.72 %, respectively, in patients of control group 1, the survival rate of dental implants was 89.48 %, which is also comparable with literature data on dental implantation in patients with diabetes mellitus [2, 8, 9]. Possibly greater effectiveness in the main group and control group 2 is associated with a new method of dental implantation (RF Patent No. 2794843 dated 25.04.2023) [7] and the use of a collapsible navigational surgical template (Patent RU No. 2796749 dated 29.05.2023) [6], which allowed the main group and the control group to fix individual trajectories of articulation of the mandible (which further allowed to avoid incorrect orthopedic rehabilitation, which could lead to uneven or excessive load on dental implants), to avoid reduction of the alveolar ridge, to plan in advance the exact position of dental implants, and also eliminated the need for the formation of muco-periosteal flaps and further suturing.
 Conclusion. The use of the technique developed by us (RF patent No. 2794843 dated 25.04.2023) allows us to increase the effectiveness of treatment of patients with type II diabetes mellitus and bring it closer to the results of practically healthy people (according to retrospective observation for two years).

Survival analysis of dental implants placed in horizontally severely resorbed maxillae after reconstruction with xenogeneic graft: a case series.

To evaluate the survival rates of dental implants with a hybrid macrostructure and the surface biomimetically coated with nanohydroxyapatite, placed in horizontally atrophic maxillae previously submitted to the guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure, associated with the use of a deproteinized bovine bone graft (DBB). Twenty-five patients who received 196 implants were involved in this study. First, these patients were submitted to GBR procedures and maxillary sinus lift, where DBB was used as the grafting material. The dental implants were placed after a minimum period of 6 months of the grafting procedures. The patients were followed up every six months and clinical/radiographic examinations were performed to assess the implants, using the following indicators as a reference: (1) Absence of mobility; (2) Absence of pain. Data about the age, surgery time, smoking status, implant size, and time between the grafting procedure and implant placement were correlated with implant failures. Twelve implants failed, generating a survival rate of 94.23%. None of the variables analysed correlated with the implant failures. Implants with a hybrid macrostructure and surface biomimetically coated with nanohydroxyapatite present good survival rates in horizontally atrophic maxillae grafted with DBB.

Long-term survival and success rate of dental implants placed in reconstructed areas with extraoral autogenous bone grafts: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

To evaluate the long-term survival and success rates of implants placed in reconstructed areas using microvascularized or non-microvascularized extraoral bone grafts. An electronic search was performed in five databases and in gray literature for articles published until June, 2023. The eligibility criteria comprised observational studies (prospective or retrospective) and clinical trials, reporting survival and success rates of implants placed in extraoral bone grafts. A meta-analysis (implant failure) was categorized into subgroups based on the type of bone graft used. The risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up time was 92 months. The summary estimate of survival rate at the implant level were 94.9% (CI: 90.1%-97.4%) for non-vascularized iliac graft, 96.5% (CI: 91.4%-98.6%) for non-vascularized calvaria graft, and 92.3% (CI: 89.1%-94.6%) for vascularized fibula graft. The mean success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) were 83.2%; 2.25 mm, 92.2%; 0.93 mm, and 87.6%; 1.49 mm, respectively. Implants placed in areas reconstructed using extraoral autogenous bone graft have high long-term survival rates and low long-term MBLs. The data did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in the survival, success, or MBL of grafts from different donor areas or with different vascularization. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202390004.

Influence of implant length and diameter on implant failure: A retrospective study

ObjectiveDental implants are widely accepted in the dental community. Although several studies have reported high dental implant survival rates, complications can still occur. Implant failure is associated with different risk factors, including implant length and diameter. However, no clear consensus has yet been reached. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of different risk factors associated with implant failure. MethodsThis study included patients who received dental implants at Kyoto University Hospital. The inclusion criteria were dental implants placed between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2022. Data on patient- and implant-related variables were collected. We used a marginal Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the association between the potential factors and implant failure. ResultsThis study included 147 patients who received 479 dental implants. Eleven of the 147 patients experienced implant failure, whereas 17 of the 479 implants failed. The cumulative survival rate of dental implants at the final time point was 95.3%. Multivariable marginal Cox analysis showed suggestive evidence that implant length (<10 mm) greatly increased the risk of implant failure compared with implant length (≥10 mm) (reference: <10 mm, hazard ratio, 0.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.01–0.34; p = 0.001). ConclusionsA cumulative survival rate comparable to that reported in other studies was achieved over prolonged periods of time. Although implant failure is multifactorial and implant length is only one of many factors contributing to implant loss, clinicians must be aware of the potential influence of implant length and make treatment decisions.

Evaluation of Survival Rates of Dental Implants and the Risk Factors: A Retrospective Follow-Up Study.

Introduction The current research sets out to assess implant early survival rates and identify relevant parameters. Methods The research spanned the years 2021 and 2022 and included all individuals who had dental implants. Various criteria, such as age, sex, maxilla/mandible, implant location, immediate implant, implant diameter, implant length, and others, were used to determine the implant survival rate in the research. A multiple logistic regression model was used to show the risk variables for early survival rates of implants, and components with p < 0.05 were further included after the Chi-square test was employed to filter them. Results The current research included 128 patients who had a single implant procedure, including 70 males and 58 females. The early survival rate was 91.40%, and 117 implants were retained after implantation. Risk variables that were shown to be associated with early survival rates were patients aged 30-60 years (OR: 2.542), immediate implant placement (OR: 3.742), and implant length less than 10 mm (OR: 3.972). Conclusions Age, tooth location, implant length, and immediate implantation were risk variables that contributed to our subjects' above 91% early survival rate of implants.

Survival of dental implants and occurrence of mucosal overgrowth in patients with head and neck cancer treated with/without radiotherapy and mucosal graft—two-year follow-up

ObjectivesThe primary aim of the present study was to compare head and neck cancer treatment modality surgery and surgery with radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy alone for dental implant (DI) survival. The second aim was to evaluate the prevalence of mucosal overgrowth around DI after treatment with or without mucosal grafts.Materials and methodsAn observational retrospective study consisted of 59 patients with malignant head and neck tumors that received DI between 2015 and 2019. Treatment modalities together with information on oral rehabilitation with DI, prevalence of mucosal overgrowth, and precursor lesions were gathered from the hospital records. Radiation doses were determined using a sum of three-dimensional dose distributions.ResultsOverall DI survival rate was 88%, in irritated jaw 89%, and in nonirradiated jaw 88% in this observational period (p = 0.415, mean follow-up was 2 years 10 months, range 9–82 months). Mucosal overgrowth was found in 42 of 196 implants (21%), of which 36 cases (86%) were associated in grafted areas (p < 0.001). Oral lichen planus/lichenoid reaction was diagnosed in 14 of all 59 (24%) oral cancer patients.ConclusionImplant survival was not significantly influenced by radiation therapy in this observational period. In grafted bone, implant survival was significantly inferior than in native bone. Mucosal overgrowth around implants was more common in mucosal grafted areas versus nongrafted.Clinical relevanceThis study demonstrates the impact of grafted bone to dental implant survival rate and mucosal overgrowth.

The cumulative survival rate of dental implants with micro-threads: a long-term retrospective study.

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term cumulative survival rate (CSR) of dental implants with micro-threads in the neck over a 10-year follow-up period and to examine the factors influencing the survival rate of dental implants. This retrospective study was based on radiographic and dental records. In total, 151 patients received 490 Oneplant® dental implants with an implant neck micro-thread design during 2006-2010 in the Department of Periodontology of Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Implant survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify the factors influencing implant failure. Ten out of 490 implants (2.04%) failed due to fixture fracture. The CSR of the implants was 97.9%, and no significant difference was observed in the CSR between external- and internal-implant types (98.2% and 97.6%, respectively, P=0.670). In Cox regression analysis, 2-stage surgery significantly increased the risk of implant failure (hazard ratio: 4.769, P=0.039). There were no significant differences in influencing factors, including sex, age, implant diameter, length, fixture type, location, surgical procedure, bone grafting, and restoration type. Within the limitations of this retrospective study, the micro-thread design of the implant neck was found to be favorable for implant survival, with stable clinical outcomes.

Reparative potential of bone tissue and associated influencing factors

The aim of the sthudy. To study the influence of general and local factors on the regenerative potential of bone tissue to optimize augmentation mechanisms in the treatment of jaw atrophy. The influence of general and local factors on the regenerative potential of the bone during the augmentation operation of the alveolar process (part) of the jaw in 68 patients was studied. The survival rate of dental implants and the incidence of complications after completion of dental rehabilitation in the long-term follow-up period (more than 5 years) were evaluated. 18 indicators were studied, which were evaluated by qualitative and quantitative methods. The study of the effect of indicators on regeneration was carried out using an accurate Fischer test for conjugacy tables. The assessment of the strength of the influence was calculated as the ratio of the chances of developing an unfavorable outcome of bone grafting and dental implantation. He highest chances of developing adverse outcomes were found in smoking patients with diabetes mellitus, high body mass index, low survival of bone walls, severe bone atrophy (5.6 and higher class according to Cawood & Howell), three-dimensional bone defect, in the absence of 3 or more bone walls, the presence of subcompensated and decompensated psychological state the patient. In the course of histological examination, the influence of these factors on the mechanisms of reparative osteogenesis morphologically manifested a lower degree of progress of regenerative processes and a lower degree of maturity of bone tissue. To reduce the chances of developing an unfavorable outcome, in the presence of negative general and local factors, it is not advisable to use dental implantation simultaneously with bone augmentation procedures. In order to reduce the pathophysiological impact of negative factors during sinus lifting, increase the proportion of autosteal material for potentiating the metabolic activity of bone tissue, as well as prescribe antioxidant, antihypoxant and membrane stabilizing therapy before surgery and in the early postoperative period.

Implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation after Ameloblastomas treatment: a systematic review

BackgroundAmeloblastoma (AM), the benign counterpart of ameloblastic carcinoma, is a benign odontogenic tumor of epithelial origin, naturally aggressive, with unlimited growth potential and a high tendency to relapse if not adequately removed. Patients with AM treated surgically can benefit from dental implant therapy, promoting oral rehabilitation and improving their quality of life. The present study aimed to determine the survival rate of dental implants placed after surgical treatment of patients affected by AM. In addition, there were two secondary objectives: 1) To evaluate which dental implant loading protocols are most frequently used and 2) To determine the type of prosthetic restoration most commonly used in these patients.MethodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed during the study. Searches were performed in three databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar) until November 2023. Additionally, the electronic search was enriched by an iterative hand search of journals related to oral pathology and medicine, maxillofacial surgery, and oral prosthodontics and implantology. Only reports and case series in English from January 2003 to date were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute tool (JBI-Case Reports/Case Series) was used for the study quality assessment.ResultsThe total number of patients and implants studied were 64 and 271, respectively, all with surgically treated AM. The patient’s ages ranged from 8 to 79 years, with a mean (SD) age of 37.3 ± 16.4. Fifty-three percent were male and 47% were female. The range of follow-up duration was 1 to 22 years. An implant survival/success rate of 98.1% was reported. In addition, most of them were conventionally loaded (38.3%). Hybrid implant-supported fixed dentures were the most commonly used by prosthodontists (53%).ConclusionsOral rehabilitation with dental implants inserted in free flaps for orofacial reconstruction in surgically treated patients with AM can be considered a safe and successful treatment modality.

Peri-implant Parameters of Dental Implants Inserted in Prefabricated Microvascular Fibular Flaps: A Retrospective Study.

To assess the peri-implant and flap parameters of the prefabricated microvascular fibula flap and determine the dental implant survival rate. This retrospective study investigated a cohort of subjects who received prefabricated microvascular fibula flaps at two highly specialized tumor reconstruction centers. The subjects had all suffered atrophy or a large segmental defect of the jaws due to tumor resection or injury. Two independent surgeons determined the dental implant survival rate and assessed the peri-implant parameters and flap parameters during clinical follow-up. In total, 41 subjects were treated with a prefabricated fibula flap between 1999 and 2012. Of these, 17 subjects (10 male, 7 female) with a total of 62 dental implants were examined. The other 24 subjects were unavailable for assessment and had to be excluded. Ten of the 62 dental implants (16.1%) had to be removed due to peri-implantitis before the follow-up assessment. Follow-up assessments were performed at intervals ranging from 2 to 12 years (mean: 7.2 years) after fibula flap transplantation. The dental implant survival rate was found to be 83.9%. A total of 208 dental surfaces were assessed. Overall, 96% of all surfaces had a pocket depth (PD) of ≤ 4 mm and 4% had a pocket depth of > 5 mm. An attachment level (AL) of 3 mm was measured in 48.5% of implants and ≥ 5 mm was measured in 15.9% of implants. Dental implants with a PD > 4 mm showed a significantly higher plaque index (PI) (75%; P = .0057), papillary bleeding index (PBI) (62.5%; P = .0094), and radiologic bone loss (P = .0014) compared to dental implants with a PD ≤ 4 mm. Reconstructive surgery using microvascular fibula flaps represents an alternative tool for oral rehabilitation in subjects suffering from a large segmental defect in the maxillary or mandibular bone compared to the conventional method. However, it appears that the different ossification processes that develop the fibula and the jawbones affect dental implant survival.

A 10-year survival rate of tapered self-tapping bone-level implants from medically compromised Korean patients at a maxillofacial surgical unit

BackgroundThe 10-year survival rate of dental implants in healthy subjects is 90–95%. While in healthy individuals, dental implants have become commonplace to solve problems of edentulism, whether dental implant treatment is optimal in patients with systemic disease remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to investigate the clinical outcomes of tapered, sand-blasted, and acid-etched internal submerged dental implants installed in medically compromised patients in our maxillofacial surgical unit.MethodsA total of 1019 Luna® dental implants were placed in 333 patients at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Kaplan–Meier survival estimates after 10 years of follow-up were computed for healthy vs. medically compromised patients.ResultsThe 10-year follow-up survival rate of 1019 Luna® dental implants in the Korean maxillofacial surgical unit was 97.0% with a mean follow-up of 41.13 ± 35.13 months (0–120 months). The survival rate was 97.0%, in which 31 implants were failed during the follow-up. Cumulative 10-year implant survival rates were 99.4% in healthy individuals without systemic disease and 95.9% in patients with systemic disease.ConclusionsComparable success and survival rates were achieved with those of implants in healthy patients. Preoperative general health assessments including laboratory test results and checking the previous medication records are essential in diagnosing any unrecognized conditions for improved implant success rates in medically compromised patients.

Survival rate of implants performed at sites of previously failed implants and factors associated with failure: A retrospective investigation

Background/purposeAlthough reimplantation is currently a common treatment procedure, little information on reimplantation success or failure is available in the literature. The purpose of the present investigation was to evaluate the survival rate of dental implants that were performed in sites of previously failed implants and identify factors associated with the treatment outcome. Materials and methodsThis retrospective study is based on a cohort of patients rehabilitated with dental implants in the dental clinics of the universities contributing data to the BigMouth network between 2011 and 2022. Implants replacing a previously failed implant at the same site were included. Cases of first and second reimplantations were included Information regarding patients' characteristics including age, gender, ethnicity, race, tobacco use, and systemic medical conditions were extracted from patients’ files. ResultsRecords of 50,333 dental implants placed in 20,842 patients over a 12-year period were screened. Three hundred seventy implants placed in 284 patients were replaced by another implant at the same site. The cumulative survival rates of implants inserted for the first time was 98.6 %, for the first replacements was 96.1 % and for the second replacements was 91.7 %. First reimplants exhibited a significantly higher risk of failure than initial implantation (p < 0.001). Similarly, second reimplants demonstrated significantly greater risk of failure (p = 0.05) when compared to initial implants. No significant associations were detected between replaced implant failures with any of the patient related parameters evaluated (p > 0.05). ConclusionWithin the limitations of the present study, dental implants replacing failed implants exhibited lower survival rates than the rates reported for the previous attempts of implant placement. No risk indicators for implant failure were identified. Additional factors should be examined in future studies.

Differences in Titanium, Titanium-Zirconium, Zirconia Implants Treatment Outcomes: a Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

The objective of this systematic review is to test the hypothesis that treatment with titanium, titanium-zirconium and zirconia dental implants has different clinical outcomes in survival rate, marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, plaque control record, and probing depth. A systematic electronic search through the PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify studies published between January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2023 containing a minimum of 10 patients per study comparing titanium (Ti), titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr), and zirconia (Zr) dental implants. Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr dental implant clinical outcomes were determined by evaluating survival rate, marginal bone level, bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque control record. Quality and risk-of-bias assessment were evaluated by Cochrane risk of bias tool. A total of 1361 articles were screened, with 10 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 301 patients with 637 implants (304 Ti, 134 Ti-Zr, and 199 Zr) were evaluated, showing a survival rate of 97.7% for Ti, 98.6% for Ti-Zr, and 93.8% for Zr implants respectively. In a meta-analysis, no difference in marginal bone level was found between Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr implants (P = 0.84). Dental implant survival rate was lower in zirconia group. Assessment of marginal bone loss and bleeding on probing showed better results with titanium-zirconium dental implants. Plaque control result was similar in all groups. Due to limited sample size assessed it was not possible to obtain conclusion on probing depth parameter.

Short dental implants

Short dental implants have been successfully used to support single and multiple fixed reconstructions in atrophic jaws, despite an increased crown-to-implant ratio. The use of short dental implants allows the treatment of patients for whom complex surgical techniques cannot be performed for medical, anatomical, or financial reasons. Furthermore, the use of short dental implants in clinical practice reduces morbidity, cost, and treatment time and reduces the need for complex surgery. The aim of this review is to evaluate the survival rates of short and extra-short dental implants and to discuss the impact of an increased crown-to-implant ratio on biologic and technical complications.

Inferior alveolar nerve repositioning surgical techniques and outcomes – a systematic review

Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) lateralization (IANL) or transposition (IANT) are both techniques allowing for dental implant placement in posterior atrophic mandibles. The aim of this study was to systematically review the implant survival rate and the complications associated with IAN reposition techniques with simultaneous implant placement in atrophic posterior mandibles.This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis). The review was designed to answer the following PICO question: Is IAN repositioning (I) a safe and efficient technique (O) to treat patient looking for fixed dental rehabilitation of an atrophic posterior mandible (P).Thirty-three articles were reviewed, including a total of 899 patients, and approximately 950 IAN repositioning procedures. Dental implant survival rate ranged between 86.95% and 100% with a mean dental survival rate of 90.16%. Among the 269 patients who underwent IANT, there were 93% immediate neurosensory disturbance, and 15% persistent neurosensory disturbance. Among the 350 patients who underwent IANL, there were 93% immediate neurosensory disturbance, and 6% persistent neurosensory disturbance.IANT and IANL are reliable techniques allowing safe dental implant placement in atrophic posterior mandible with high patient satisfaction. IANL seems to cause less persistent neurosensory disturbances compared to IANT. The level of evidence is poor due to the high number of bias present in the included studies. IAN neurosensory disturbance assessment should be better homogenized in order to increase comparability.

Survival Rate of Dental Implants in the Cleft Area: A Cross-Sectional Retrospective Study.

This study aimed to evaluate the survival rate of osseointegrated implants installed in the cleft area. An extensive data survey was conducted using the medical records of individuals who had implants installed in the cleft area between 1999 and 2020. The variables assessed were age, sex, implant follow-up time, implantation procedures, and rehabilitation with implant-supported prostheses. Data were analyzed in terms of implant survival time, correlating with the factors: age, sex, execution, or no-execution of bone regrafting, the time interval between secondary alveolar bone grafting and regrafting, the time interval between regrafting and implant installation, and the time interval between implant installation and provisional and definitive prosthesis. Data were analyzed with respect to implant survival. χ 2 and Student t tests were used with a 5% significance level. A total of 1295 medical records were analyzed, of which 688 reported implants in cleft areas (56.1% in females, 43.9% in males) with a success rate of 92.73% and a mean follow-up time of 53.2 (±45.0) months. There were no statistically significant differences in the correlation between the survival rate and sex ( P = 0.895, χ 2 test), between the implant survival rate and regrafted area ( P = 0.904, χ 2 test), or between the survival rate and patient age ( P = 0.246, Student t test). The survival rate of implants in the cleft area was 92.73%. Age, sex, and the need for regrafting did not influence the survival rate of implants installed in the cleft area. Clinical studies that evaluate the survival rate of implants installed in patients with cleft maxilla are of great relevance to the dental field.

Survival rate of implants following maxillary sinus floor augmentation using freeze-dried allografts vs bovine derived xenografts: A retrospective multicenter study

IntroductionThis study aims to compare the surgical and clinical complications, and the dental implant survival rate after maxillary sinus floor augmentation using demineralized freeze-dried bone allografts (DFDBA) versus bovine derived xenografts. Material and methodsA retrospective study enrolled 107 patients (52 males and 55 females, mean age group 1: 54,4 years; group 2: 56,4 years) requiring maxillary bone reconstruction prior to implantation. A total of 141 sinuses were grafted and 191 implants were placed. Data on various variables, including patient characteristics, implant placement details, and outcomes, were collected through medical records and patient questionnaires. ResultsThe study found no significant differences in implant survival rates between the two groups (94,0% versus 94,4%; p = 0,919). Overall complications were observed in 19.6% of patients, with a higher incidence in the allograft group (23,6% versus 15,4%; p = 0,283). Multiple logistic regression analysis identified a two-stage surgical protocol (OR= 2,8; p = 0,045), and a preoperative alveolar ridge height of less than 4 mm (OR= 5,3; p = 0,004) as significant predictors of complications. The risk of implant failure was raised by a preoperative alveolar ridge height of less than 4 mm (OR= 6,1; p = 0,038) and smoking (OR= 5,8; p = 0,012). DiscussionDFDBA is a reliable treatment option for extensive rehabilitation of atrophic maxilla, with a success rate comparable to xenografts used in sinus augmentation. Implant failure was significantly correlated with smoking and a residual ridge height of less than 4 mm.

Efficacy of Nasal Floor Augmentation on the Survival Rate of Dental Implants: A Systematic Review.

To systematically review the existing scientific literature, to summarize and assess the efficacy of the nasal floor augmentation on the survival rate of dental implants by systematically reviewing the available literature. Review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42027289143. Electronic databases like PubMed, google scholar and Ebsco Host were searched from 2000 to December 2021 for studies reporting efficacy of nasal floor augmentation and reporting outcomes in terms of survival rates of dental implants. Quality assessment of included comparative follow-up studies was done using the critical checklist put forward by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) was used. Only nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Of those nine studies, five were case reports and four comparative follow-up studies. A total of 14 implants were placed in five patients with a survival rate of 100% in included case reports, while a total of 408 implants were placed in 130 patients with survival rates ranging from 89% to 100% in included comparative follow-up studies. No complications were observed during follow-ups, and the patients were satisfied with the functional and aesthetic results of the treatment. Quality assessment of included studies showed moderate to low risk of bias with overall high quality of studies. The results of this systematic review indicate that implant placement by nasal floor augmentation techniques can be considered as a predictable treatment modality. However, due to the scarcity of literature, more studies should be carried out on proving the efficacy of nasal floor augmentation on survival rate or success of dental Implants.

Vestibuloplasty and its impact on the long-term survival and success of dental implants in irradiated and non-irradiated patients after head and neck tumor therapy: a retrospective study

ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the influence of vestibuloplasty on the clinical success and survival of dental implants in head and neck tumor patients.Materials and methodsA retrospective single-center study was conducted. All patients received surgical therapy of a tumor in the head or neck and underwent surgical therapy and, if necessary, radiotherapy/radiochemotherapy. Patients with compromised soft tissue conditions received vestibuloplasty using a split thickness skin graft and an implant-retained splint. Implant survival and success and the influence of vestibuloplasty, gender, radiotherapy, and localizations were evaluated.ResultsA total of 247 dental implants in 49 patients (18 women and 31 men; mean age of 63.6 years) were evaluated. During the observation period, 6 implants were lost. The cumulative survival rate was 99.1% after 1 year and 3 years and 93.1% after 5 years for patients without vestibuloplasty, compared to a survival and success rate of 100% after 5 years in patients with vestibuloplasty. Additionally, patients with vestibuloplasty showed significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption rates after 5 years (mesial: p = 0.003; distal: p = 0.001).ConclusionThis study demonstrates a high cumulative survival and success rate of dental implants after 5 years in head and neck tumor patients, irrespective of irradiation. Patients with vestibuloplasty showed a significantly higher rate of implant survival and significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption after 5 years.Clinical relevanceVestibuloplasty should always be considered and applied if required by the anatomical situations to achieve high implant survival/success rates in head and neck tumor patients.

Complete Full Arch Supported by Short Implant (&lt;8 mm) in Edentulous Jaw: A Systematic Review

Background: This study aimed to evaluate survival rate, marginal bone levels, and full arch prosthetic success on short implants when placed in areas of severely resorbed and edentulous mandibles. Methods: This is a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials of at least 10 patients with a control group in which bone augmentations were performed that were published between January 2010 and February 2023. Only three relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. Results: This review showed that short-term dental implant survival rates ranged from 94.2% to 97.4% with a five-year follow-up, and prosthetic success rates ranged around 62% during the same follow-up. The mean marginal bone level values of the affected short implants ranged from 0.2 mm to 0.6 mm. Conclusions: The data obtained demonstrated that short dental implants positioned with criterion and precision as a full-arch fixed support are a valid therapeutic choice for the medium–long-term rehabilitation of severe edentulous mandibular atrophy.