Biological and Technical Complications of Splinted or Nonsplinted Dental Implants: A Decision Tree for Selection

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Risk Indicator Analyses of Narrow-Diameter Implants in the Posterior Jaw: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 10 to 27 Years

OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction with narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) in the posterior jaws and to identify the risk indicators for NDI failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed 479 patients with 666 NDIs (diameter ≤ 3.5 mm) -supported fixed prostheses in posterior jaws, with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Implant survival, success, complications, demographics, and implantation characteristics were collected. Risk indicators for posterior NDI failure were analyzed using multilevel Cox regression analyses with mixed effects. Patient satisfaction and oral health impact profile (OHIP) were surveyed in a random 10% sample.

RESULTS

Over a mean follow-up of 14.0 ± 3.6 years, implant survival was 95.9% at the implant level and 94.6% at the patient level. Success rates were 93.5% at the implant level and 91.6% at the patient level. Multilevel Cox regression analysis identified an implant length of 10 mm or less (p = 0.001) and the use of single crowns (p = 0.005) as significant risk indicators for posterior NDI failure. Patients showed high satisfaction (4.54/5) with posterior NDIs, and the mean OHIP score of 1.15 reflected an acceptable level of oral health.

CONCLUSION

NDIs in the posterior jaws demonstrated robust long-term success and high patient satisfaction. An implant length of 10 mm or less and the use of single crowns are potential risk indicators for posterior NDI failure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200062337 on 2022/08/02.

Impact of splinting implant-supported crowns on the performance of adjacent posterior implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

While rehabilitation with implant-supported crowns in the posterior region is widely practiced, guidance on clinical considerations when choosing between splinted or nonsplinted implant-supported crowns is limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to assess whether adjacent implants with internal connections in the posterior region should be treated with splinted or nonsplinted crowns.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The systematic review was registered on the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) under the code, CRD42021248525. Two authors searched 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) independently for articles published up to December 2023. Additionally, a hand search was conducted in the nonpeer-reviewed literature and the reference lists of included articles. Only clinical studies comparing splinted and nonsplinted hexagonal or conical internal connection adjacent implants in the posterior region were considered. A single-arm meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan. Risk of bias and quality were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Tool for Assessing Risk and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

Qualitative synthesis included 17 studies, and quantitative synthesis involved 13 studies. A total of 2085 implants (1244 splinted and 841 nonsplinted) were inserted in 1027 participants, with observation times ranging from 5 months to 16 years. Thirteen studies related the type of crown retention (cemented or screw-retained). Only 2 studies related annual bone loss results considering the type of crown retention, but whether they were splinted or nonsplinted crowns and significant differences were not specified. The meta-analysis revealed no statistical differences between splinted and nonsplinted implants for biological complications (P=.95, I2=0%). However, the nonsplinted implants exhibited significantly more mechanical complications than the splinted implants (P<.001, I2=1%, RR 0.37; 95% IC [0.26-0.54]). The studies included demonstrated a low risk of bias and were of good quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Splinting was not found to affect the incidence of biological complications in posterior adjacent implants. However, more mechanical complications occurred in nonsplinted crowns than splinted ones.

A pattern of peri-implantitis affecting middle implants in 3-implant splinted prostheses

BACKGROUND

Previous investigators have noted an increased risk of crestal bone loss and failure of the middle implant of 3-implant-splinted (3-IS) fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Possible causes have included ill-fitting prostheses, unhygienic prosthetic contours, and discrepancies in prosthetic platform heights.

METHODS & RESULTS

We identified four cases in which the middle implant of a 3-IS multiunit FDP suffered advanced bone loss, ultimately leading to implant removal. While more than one possible risk for implant failure existed in each case, a common thread was that the prosthetic platform of the middle implant for all patients was coronally positioned relative to the corresponding mesial and/or distal implants.

CONCLUSIONS

Splinting three adjacent implants into one prosthesis may add risk for a variety of reasons possibly including small differences in the heights of the three prosthetic tables.

KEY POINTS

Why are these cases new information? Our observations suggest that discrepancies between implant prosthetic platforms supporting 3-implant splinted, multiunit FDPs may be an added risk factor for middle implant failure. What are the keys to successful management of these cases? It is possible that small differences in apico-coronal implant positioning with 3-implant splinted multiunit FDPs may affect the success of the middle implants. What are the primary limitations to success in these cases? There is limited literature involving precise protocols and long-term outcomes of 3-implant splinted implant restorations. Studies comparing 3-implant splinted FDPs to other configurations are needed.

An up to thirty-year retrospective study on the success and survival of single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns in a dental school setting

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Studies investigating the survival of implant-supported crowns provided in a dental school setting are sparse.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the success and reasons for failure of single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns provided in a dental school.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using the axiUm dental management software program and paper charts, all single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns provided between September 1989 and January 2020 were included for evaluation. Success, survival, and failure were recorded as well as reasons for failure. A Kaplan-Meier survival estimate with an associated P value, a life table analysis, and a log-rank test comparing the survival of single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns were performed.

RESULTS

Over 30 years, 678 implant-supported crowns (586 single unit and 92 splinted) had been provided. Of these crowns, 17 (2.90%) single unit crowns and 5 (5.43%) splinted crowns failed, with most being prosthetic failures for both single units (64.7%) and splinted (80%), rather than biologic failures. A total of 371 single unit (63.3%) and 46 splinted (50.0%) implant crowns were a complete success, and 215 single unit (36.7%) and 46 splinted (50.0%) crowns survived but had some type of complication. The overall implant-supported crown survival rate was 96.8%. The survival distribution of the single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns was not statistically significantly different [χ2(2)=1.285, P=.257].

CONCLUSIONS

Both single unit and splinted implant-supported crowns had high success rates and showed similar survival rates. The most common causes of complications were also similar, with debonding and screw loosening of crowns being the most common complication for both single unit and splinted crowns.

Immediate loading on two adjacent single dental implants with definitive nonsplinted restorations: A proof of concept in the posterior zone

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical, clinician- and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of two adjacent single posterior implants immediately loaded with definitive single crowns up to 1 year. Ten patients in need of two adjacent posterior single implants were included. All implants were placed applying a fully digital workflow. Definitive screw-retained single zirconia crowns were delivered within 72 h after implant placement. Clinical parameters, patient- and clinician-reported outcomes were assessed up to 1 year of follow-up.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Clinical outcomes remained stable, with no implant failures or technical and biological complications throughout the observation period. Patient satisfaction was very high at baseline (crown delivery) and remained consistently high at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Crown insertion 3 days after implant placement was rated as an easy procedure by clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Two adjacent single implants with immediate definitive restorations (<72 h) in the posterior region appear to be a viable and easy treatment option to shorten the overall treatment time and potentially enhancing patient satisfaction. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the advantages of this treatment protocol over a delayed loading approach.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

In selected cases, immediate implant loading with definitive restorations in the posterior region appears a valuable and straightforward option to shorten the overall treatment time.

Marginal Bone Loss in Posterior Implants Placed at Different Levels and Different Prosthetic Designs: A Retrospective Study With a Minimum of 1-Year Follow-Up

Various factors influence marginal bone loss after implant placement. This study explored the association between marginal bone loss and posterior implants positioned at different bone levels. Computer records and radiographs of patients with at least 2 adjacent implants were retrieved. Cases were categorized into nonsplinted prosthesis and splinted prosthesis groups. Radiographic measurements were conducted at the time of abutment placement (T0), 1-3 years follow-up (T1), and the last visit (T2), measuring the vertical distance between adjacent implants. Multilevel linear regression models using generalized estimating equations were employed, with a significance level set at 5% (α = 0.05). Fifty-six patient records were included, comprising 120 implants: 84 nonsplinted (70%) and 36 splinted (30%). In the nonsplinted group, marginal bone loss progression significantly depended on crestal height differences. For the mesial sides of posterior implants, marginal bone loss measured 1.0 ± 0.6 mm from T0 to T1, 2.4 ± 1.1 mm from T1 to T2, and 3.4 ± 1.2 mm from T0 to T2. Similarly, the distal sides of the most anteriorly placed implant exhibited marginal bone loss of 1.0 ± 0.7 mm from T0 to T1, 2.4 ± 1.0 mm from T1 to T2, and 3.5 ± 1.2 mm from T0 to T2. Nonsplinted implants demonstrated a higher progression of marginal bone loss. This study suggests that nonsplinted implants may lead to a more pronounced progression of marginal bone loss, particularly concerning crestal height differences, underscoring the need for further research.

Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone levels around implants supporting splinted fixed bridges: A retrospective study on 412 implants

OBJECTIVES

The effect of the implant position within the prosthesis on bone remodeling is scarcely documented so far. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate whether central implants may suffer higher peri-implant marginal bone levels (MBL) compared to laterals in case of fixed splinted bridges supported by ≥ three implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Partially edentulous subjects rehabilitated with at least one fixed bridge supported by ≥ three dental implants were enrolled. MBL was assessed radiographically by means of intraoral radiographs acquired with phosphor plates and imported in a dedicated software. MBL was calculated as the distance between the implant platform level and the most coronal visible bone-to-implant contact. A three-level linear mixed effects model was used for investigating the fixed effect of patient-, prosthesis-, and implant-level variables on the MBL.

RESULTS

Overall, 90 patients rehabilitated with 130 splinted fixed bridges supported by 412 implants were included. The median follow-up was 136 months. The mean peri-implant MBL resulted statistically significantly higher at central implants if compared to lateral implants (p < .01). The estimated MBL averages for central and external implants were 1.68 and 1.18 mm, respectively. The prosthesis-level variables suggested that a cement-retained bridge was prone to a significant 0.82 mm higher MBL than a screw-retained one. Implant surface showed an association with MBL changes, although less pronounced than implant retention.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of ≥3 adjacent implants supporting splinted bridges, central implants were more predisposed to MBL compared to laterals. At the prosthesis level, implants supporting cement-retained bridges were statistically more susceptible to MBL compared to screw-retained ones. Surface characteristics can also influence MBL stability at the implant level.

Splinting or non-splinting of fixed prostheses on adjacent implants: A critical review

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to identify, through a critical review of the literature, the success factors associated with the splinting of fixed prostheses on adjacent implants of the posterior sectors in partially edentulous patients compared with those not splinted.

STUDY SELECTION

A MEDLINE strategy was implemented based on a research question to systematically search and extract information from databases (PubMed and Scopus) using MeSH terms/keywords identified for each domain. Systematic reviews, clinical and in vitro studies were selected and classified according to eligibility criteria based on the research question and level of evidence using the PRISMA flowchart.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies were selected for data extraction and analysis according to study design (three systematic reviews, 14 clinical studies, and 15 in vitro studies). Overall, the studies found no significant difference in the association between the survival rate and prosthesis type. In clinical studies, there have been no differences in marginal bone loss between splinted and non-splinted prostheses, and the influence of peri-implant status and restorative materials has been poorly evaluated. The distribution of stress and loads determined in the in vitro studies showed results that could favor splinted prostheses; however, are generally associated with implant design.

CONCLUSIONS

The need for splinted or non-splinted adjacent implant-supported prostheses remains controversial. The reviewed evidence indicates that factors such as implant size and its relationship with coronal height could be important in decision-making.

Screw-retained ceramic-veneered/monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A 5 to 10-year retrospective study on survival and complications

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical performance of screw-retained, ceramic-veneered, monolithic zirconia partial implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (ISFDP) over 5-10 years and to evaluate implant- and prosthesis-related factors influencing treatment failure and complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Partially edentulous patients treated with screw-retained all-ceramic ISFDPs with 2-4 prosthetic units with a documented follow-up of ≥5 years after implant loading were included in this retrospective study. The outcomes analyzed included implant/prosthesis failure and biological/technical complications. Possible risk factors were identified using the mixed effects Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A screened sample of 171 participants with 208 prostheses (95% of the restorations were splinted crowns without a pontic) supported by 451 dental implants were enrolled in this study. The mean follow-up duration after prosthesis delivery was 82.4 ±17.2 months. By the end of the follow-up period, 431 (95.57%) of the 451 implants remained functional at the implant level. At the prosthesis level, 185 (88.94%) of the 208 partial ISFDPs remained functional. Biological complications were observed in 67 implants (14.86%), and technical complications were observed in 62 ISFDPs (29.81%). Analysis revealed only emergence profiles (over-contoured) as a significant risk factor for implant failure (P<0.001) and biological complications (P<0.001). Full-coverage ceramic-veneered zirconia prostheses had a significantly greater chance of chipping (P<0.001) compared with buccal-ceramic-veneered or monolithic zirconia prostheses.

CONCLUSIONS

Screw-retained ceramic-veneered, monolithic partial ISFDPs have a favorable long-term survival rate. Over-contoured emergence profile is a significant risk factor associated with implant failure and biological complications. Buccal-ceramic-veneered and monolithic zirconia partial ISFDPs lower the initial prevalence of chipping compared with a full-coverage veneered design.

Predictive model for temporomandibular disorder in adolescents: Decision tree

BACKGROUND

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) do not only occur in adults but also in adolescents, with negative impacts on their development.

AIM

To propose a predictive model for TMD in adolescents using a decision tree (DT) analysis and to identify groups at high and low risk of developing TMD in the city of Recife, PE, Brazil.

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study was conducted in Recife on 1342 schoolchildren of both sexes aged 10-17 years. The analyses were performed using Pearson's chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test, as well as the CHAID algorithm for the construction of the DT. The SPSS statistical program was used.

RESULTS

The prevalence of TMD was 33.2%. Statistically significant associations were observed between TMD and sex, depression, self-reported orofacial pain, and orofacial pain on clinical examination. The DT consisted of self-reported orofacial pain, orofacial pain on physical examination, and depression, with an overall predictive power of 73.0%.

CONCLUSION

The proposed tree has a good predictive capacity and permits to identify groups at high risk of developing TMD among adolescents, such as those with self-reported orofacial pain or orofacial pain on examination associated with depression.

The significance of vertical platform discrepancies and splinting on marginal bone levels for adjacent dental implants

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the influence of vertical platform discrepancies for splinted and non-splinted adjacent implants on radiographic marginal bone loss (RMBL).

METHODS

Data from January 2000 to February 2021 were collected from the electronic charts of 156 patients with 337 implants at the UCSF School of Dentistry. Five different implant restoration categories were evaluated for radiographic evidence of proximal RMBL. Patients with (1) two adjacent single crowns, (2) two adjacent splinted crowns, (3) three-unit bridges supported by two implants, (4) three adjacent single crowns, and (5) three adjacent splinted crowns. Inclusion required baseline radiograph taken at the time of prosthesis delivery or final impression, and follow-up radiographs at least 12 months after restorations have been in function. Measurements assessed included vertical distance between adjacent implant platforms and proximal RMBL around implants. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of implants with ≥1 mm RMBL between different type of restorations were calculated.

RESULTS

In general, prostheses supported by splinted adjacent implants demonstrated a significant association with the presence of ≥1 mm RMBL (OR = 2.55, 95% CI = 1.17-5.17, p = 0.018) when compared to prostheses supported by non-splinted adjacent implants. In addition, prostheses with a vertical platform discrepancy ≥0.5 mm demonstrated a significant association with the presence of ≥1 mm RMBL (OR = 4.30, 95% CI = 1.85 to 10.01, p = 0.007) when compared to prostheses with a vertical platform discrepancy <0.5 mm. When adjacent implants had ≥0.5 mm vertical platform discrepancy, the majority (66.67%) of three splinted adjacent crowns had at least one implant with ≥1 mm RMBL. This was followed by two splinted adjacent crowns (58.97%), three-unit bridge (25.93%), two single adjacent crowns (24.24%), and three single adjacent crowns (18.18%). When adjacent implants had ≥1 mm vertical platform discrepancy, there was an increased percentage of implants with ≥1 mm RMBL. The restorative design associated with the highest percent of implants with bone loss was three splinted adjacent crowns (70%), two splinted adjacent crowns (61.11%), three single adjacent crowns (40%), and three-unit bridge and two single adjacent implants (21.05%). Three splinted adjacent crowns were significantly associated with ≥1 mm RMBL when compared to three-unit bridge (OR 6.56, 95% CI 1.59-27.07). Similarly, two splinted crowns were significantly associated with ≥1 mm RMBL when compared to two single crowns (OR = 2.50, 95% CI = 1.08-5.79).

CONCLUSION

Two or three adjacent implants placed with a vertical platform discrepancy, when splinted together, are associated with higherincidence of ≥1 mm RMBL than non-splinted restorations.

Is the degree of physiological bone remodeling a predictive factor for peri-implantitis?

BACKGROUND

The amount of initial physiological bone remodeling (IPBR) after implant placement varies and the ways it may play a role in peri-implantitis development remains unknown. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the association between the amount of IPBR during the first year of implant placement and incidence of peri-implantitis as well as the pattern of progressive bone loss.

METHODS

Clinical and radiographic documentation of implants at the time of implant placement (T0), 1 year ± 6 months after crown placement (T1), and at a ≥2-year follow-up from implant placement (T2) were retrospectively collected. IPBR was defined as the bone loss occurring from implant placement to the end of the bone remodeling (T1). Cases were grouped into those diagnosed with (test) or without peri-implantitis (PIm) (control). Linear regression model under generalized estimation equation approach was estimated to assess correlation between marginal bone loss (MBL) rates in both periods (T1-T0) and (T2-T1). Receiver operating characteristics curve was estimated to explore an optimal cut-off point of T1-T0 MBL to discriminate between PIm and no-PIm implants.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients receiving 57 implants without PIm and 40 with PIm were included. There were no associations between PIm and IPBR (p &gt; 0.05), nor between BML of (T2-T1) and (T1-T0). However, arch and total follow-up showed significant influence on the probability of PIm. Splinted implants showed an MBL rate of 0.60-mm/year higher than non-splinted implants (p &lt; 0.001) from T1 to T2.

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant association was found between IPBR and incidence of peri-implantitis.

Clinical and radiographic evaluations of implants as surveyed crowns for Class I removable partial dentures: A retrospective study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate survival rates and marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants in IC-RPDs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy implants were placed and used as surveyed crowns in 30 RPDs. The survival rates and MBL around implants based on multiple variables, e.g., position, sex, age, opposing dentitions, splinting, type of used retainer, and first year bone loss, were analyzed. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) regarding functional/esthetic improvement after IC-RPD treatment, and complications were also inspected.

RESULTS

The 100% implant survival rates were observed, and 60 of those implants showed MBL levels less than 1.5 mm. No significant differences in MBL of implants were observed between implant positions (maxilla vs. mandible; P = .341) and type of used retainers (P = .630). The implant MBL of greater than 0.5 mm at 1 year showed significantly higher MBL after that (P < .001). Splinted implant surveyed crowns showed lower MBL in the maxilla (splinted vs. non-splinted; P = .037). There were significant esthetic/functional improvements observed after treatment, but there were no significant differences in esthetic results based on implant position (maxilla vs. mandible). Implants in mandible showed significantly greater improvement in function than implants in the maxilla (P = .002). Prosthetic complication of IC-RPD was not observed frequently. However, 2 abutment teeth among 60 were failed. The bone loss of abutment teeth was lower than MBL of implants in IC-RPDs (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Class I RPD connected to residual teeth and strategically positioned implants as surveyed crowns can be a viable treatment modality.

Survival Rates of Splinted and Nonsplinted Prostheses Supported by Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the implant survival rates, marginal bone loss, and mechanical complications of prostheses supported by splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Electronic database (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and EMBASE) and manual searches up to May 2021 were conducted to identify studies comparing splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm). The primary outcome was implant survival rate. Secondary outcomes were marginal bone loss and mechanical complications. The quality of included studies and risk-of-bias were assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Twelve studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and featured 1506 short implants (596 nonsplinted and 910 splinted) with a follow-up time ranging from 1 to 16 years. Quantitative analysis found no statistically significant differences between splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm) for survival rate (RR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.96, 1.01; p = 0.26)) and marginal bone loss (SMD = -0.08; 95% CI - 0.23, 0.07; p = 0.28). Veneer chipping, abutment screw breakage, screw loosening, and loss of retention were reported in the selected studies as common complications. However, no statistically significant difference was found between splinted and nonsplinted short implants (RR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.20, 1.54; p = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present meta-analysis, it might be concluded that splinted short implants (≤8.5 mm) do not present superior performance in survival rate, marginal bone maintenance and prevention of mechanical complications compared with single-unit prostheses.

Early peri-implant bone loss as a predictor for peri-implantitis: A 10-year prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of early bone loss (EBL), on long-term bone stability and future peri-implantitis development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients referred for implant placement between 2005 and 2009 were consecutively treated and followed for 10 years. After 10 years, patients were invited for a scientific diagnostic visit to evaluate implant survival and bone loss. Bone level changes were compared with baseline. Non-parametric testing was performed in cross-tabs (Pearson Chi-square and Fishers's exact test). Kaplan-Meier-estimated survival curves were plotted for different thresholds for EBL at different timepoints. Generalized linear mixed models with binomial distribution and logit link for peri-implantitis were fitted. An adjusted logistic mixed model was made to evaluate peri-implantitis, in relation with smoking status, history of periodontitis, and EBL > 0.5 mm.

RESULTS

Four hundred and seven patients (mean age of 64.86 years [range 28-92, SD 10.11]), with 1482 implants, responded to the 10-year recall invitation. After an average follow-up time of 10.66 years (range 10-14, SD 0.87), implant survival was 94.74%. Mean crestal bone loss after 10 years was 0.81 mm (SD 1.58, range 0.00-17.00). One hundred and seventy five implants in 76 patients had peri-implantitis (11.8% on implant level, 18.7% on patient level). EBL of 0.5, 1, and 2 mm were significant predictors for peri-implantitis and implant loss after 10 years. Implants with EBL ≥0.5 mm during the first year of function showed a 5.43 times higher odds for future peri-implantitis development. Probability in developing peri-implantitis was 52.06% when smoking, Periodontal history and EBL of >0.5 mm was combined.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that EBL is a predictor for long-term peri-implant pathology, with a significant higher risk for peri-implantitis when early bone loss exceeds the thresholds of 0.5 and 1 mm, especially when additional risk factors such as smoking or susceptibility for periodontal disease prior to implant treatment are present. Clinical trial registration number B670201524796.

Clinical Comparation of Extra-Short (4 mm) and Long (>8 mm) Dental Implants Placed in Mandibular Bone: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis

This systematic review (SR) aimed to evaluate implant survival rate, marginal bone loss (MBL), and biological/prosthetic complications of extra-short 4 mm dental implants. An electronic search without language or date restrictions was performed in five databases and in gray literature for articles published until August 2020. Prospective cohort studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the clinical performance of extra-short 4 mm dental implants were included. Studies were independently assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. The protocol of this SR was registered in the PROSPERO database under number CRD42019139709. Four studies were included in the present SR. There was no significant difference in implant survival rate (p = 0.75) between extra-short 4 mm and long implants. After 12 months of function, the extra-short implants had a significantly (p = 0.003) lower marginal bone loss (MBL) rate when compared to long implants. Extra-short implants had a lower number of biological and prosthetic complications when compared to long implants. After 12 months of follow-up, extra-short 4 mm dental implants placed in the mandible exhibit satisfactory clinical outcomes concerning implant survival rate and MBL when compared to longer implants, with a low number of biological and prosthetic complications. A higher number of RCTs with longer follow-up is necessary for the future.

Aesthetic Parameters and Patient-Perspective Assessment Tools for Maxillary Anterior Single Implants

Background

This review aimed to concisely describe the current aesthetic objective indices for a single-implant maxillary anterior crown. The secondary aim was to propose introducing a unified, standardized questionnaire for adequately collecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in implant dentistry.

Materials and Methods

A literature review was conducted using both EMBASE/Ovid and MEDLINE/PubMed databases by combining keywords and Emtree/Mesh terms related to “Esthetics,” “Self-Assessment or Surveys and Questionnaires,” and “Single-Tooth Dental Implants.”

Results

The most meaningful aesthetic objective indices for single implants in the literature are the Pink Esthetic Score (PES), the Papilla Presence Index (PPI), Peri‐Implant and Crown Index (PICI), PES/White Esthetic Score (PES/WES), the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI), and a modified version of the ICAI (mod-ICAI) index. Clearly, PES/WES is still the most widely accepted tool. It is encouraging to observe that there is an increasing tendency in recent years to report PROMs more frequently in the implant dentistry literature. We proposed the implementation of a unified, standardized questionnaire using a self-administered visual analogue scale (VAS) scoring system, which evaluates overall satisfaction, comfort, tooth appearance, gingival appearance, function, and hygiene complexity. This tool should be validated in the oral implantology research context for its regular implementation or further development.

Conclusions

Conducting qualitative studies among dental implant patients who received few implants or single-tooth implant reconstructions in the aesthetic zone may help dental researchers understand better how to efficiently develop and validate a quantitative instrument. This standard tool would reduce heterogeneity bias by providing comparable data between studies.

Evaluation of 1-Piece Versus 3-Piece Framework Designs for the Edentulous Mandible with Fixed Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Clinical, Occlusal and Biomechanical Study

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the clinical, occlusal and biomechanical performance of 1-piece and 3-piece designs for implant-supported fixed dentures in the edentulous mandible.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 65 patients with edentulous mandibles who underwent fixed implant-supported restorations were recruited and subsequently assigned to 1 of 2 groups based on the framework design (1-piece or 3-piece). The participants underwent clinical and occlusal examination using a periodontal probe, T-Scan III system, and electromyography 12 months after prosthesis delivery. Two mandibular finite element models were created to evaluate stress values and their distribution during function.

RESULTS

Ninety-five point four percent (n = 62) of participants in the follow-up period underwent clinical and occlusal examination after prosthesis delivery. Clinical examination revealed a trend towards increased inflammation around the implants in the 1-piece prostheses. Occlusal parameters indicated that the 1-piece design was superior for the masticatory system than the 3-piece design. Biomechanical analysis revealed the highest stress values in the posterior region of the 3-piece design.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of ease of ensuring oral hygiene, when compared to the 3-piece design, the 1-piece framework design might be the superior therapy for restoring an edentulous mandible, based on occlusal and biomechanical outcomes.

The risk for infraposition of dental implants and ankylosed teeth in the anterior maxilla related to craniofacial growth, a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to evaluate a potential association between individuals with different craniofacial types or other exposures, and the risk of infraposition due to continued growth/eruption of adjacent teeth in the anterior maxilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a systematic review in which primary studies as well as other systematic reviews are scrutinised. A search of PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of science and Health technology assessment (HTA) organisations and a complementary handsearch was carried out. Selected studies were read in full-text by several reviewers. The quality of the included primary studies was assessed using a protocol for assessment of risk of bias in exposure studies.

RESULTS

The literature search resulted in 3,296 publications. Title and abstract screening yielded 25, whereof one systematic review, potential publications allocated for full-text inspection. The quality assessment resulted in a total of seven studies with a low/moderate risk of bias and four studies with a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, a long-term risk for infraposition of dental implants, or ankylosed teeth, among natural teeth can be observed in some cases. The predisposing factors are still not fully understood since the current scientific evidence is very limited.

Risk factors for abutment and implant fracture after loading

PURPOSE

Implant component fractures are one of the most serious complications in implant treatment. With a better understanding of the risk factors for fracture in the preoperative, surgery, superstructure, and post-loading phases of implant treatment, low-risk treatment could reduce implant component fractures, leading to a better prognosis. The aim of this study was to clarify the risk factors for abutment and implant fractures that occur after loading, and to perform a retrospective, approximately 10-year follow-up study to explore the risk factors in each treatment phase.

METHODS

Subjects were fitted with an implant prosthesis between January 2008 and December 2009. In total, 1,126 Ankylos implants in 430 patients were included for analysis. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to extract factors related to non-fracture and fracture of the abutment or implant as a dependent variable.

RESULTS

Gender (OR = 3.466, 95% CI 1.296-9.268, P = 0.013), gonial angle (OR = 3.420, 95% CI 1.308-8.945, P = 0.012), and splinting status of the superstructure (OR = 4.456, 95% CI 1.861-10.669, P = 0.001) were identified as significant risk factors.

CONCLUSION

The risk of fracture is increased in males, especially those with a mandibular angle of less than 120° on panoramic radiographs, and those with a non-splinted superstructure.

Comparison of splinted and non-splinted superstructures of three implants placed in a mandibular distal extension model with missing teeth using modal analysis

This study evaluated the effects of two types of superstructures (splinted crown and non-splinted crown) on four vibration characteristics (natural frequency, damping ratio (DAR), vectors in antiphase, maximum displacement (MDP)) by using modal analysis. These structures were fabricated on three implants placed in the mandibular free-end defect model. After placing three implants on a mandibular distal extension model with missing teeth, the three-unit splinted and non-splinted crowns were designed on the CAD software. Subsequently, the zirconia disc was milled using a milling machine to produce the superstructures (n = 5). After establishing four measurement points on each crown of the prostheses, a vibration was applied to the mandible model with an impact hammer, and the transfer function of each measurement point was identified. Using the modal analysis software, the natural frequency and damping ratios were calculated from the transfer function, modal shapes at each natural frequency were observed, and maximum displacement that takes into account the lateral force during mastication was simulated. The t-test was performed for each of the averaged values of natural frequency, maximum displacement, and damping ratio (p < 0.05). Mann-Whitney U test was performed on the average of the number of vectors in antiphase (p < 0.05). The mean natural frequency was significantly higher in the splinted crown (758.2 ± 2.8 Hz) than that in the non-splinted crown (752.8 ± 3.7 Hz) (P = 0.047). The mean damping ratio was not significantly different for the splinted (3.3 ± 0.2%) and non-splinted crowns (3.2 ± 0.3%) (P = 0.535). The average number of vectors in antiphase was significantly smaller in the non-splinted crown (4.4 ± 0.9) than in the splinted crown (10 ± 2.5) (P = 0.008). The mean value of the maximum displacement was significantly smaller in the splinted crown (6.7 ± 1.1 μm) than that in the non-splinted crown (7.3 ± 0.6 μm) (P = 0.048). Within the limitations of this study, the vibration characteristics of the superstructures differed between designs with splinted and non-splinted crowns. Crown splinting increased the rigidity and natural frequency and decreased the MDP. However, the higher number of vectors in antiphase indicated more twists in the superstructures during vibration. The non-splinted crowns showed a lower natural frequency and a greater maximum displacement; however, they comprised fewer vectors in antiphase, indicating that the twist during vibration was less than that observed with the splinted crowns. Thus, our results suggest that crown splinting reduces the deformation of the superstructure, implants, and the surrounding tissues in comparison to the deformation observed when no splinting is performed.

Proposal and In-Depth Analysis of Emergency Treatment Procedures for Removing Fractured Abutments in Implants With Tapped-In Connections: Case Report

In implant-supported prostheses, the most frequently reported mechanical complications after implant restoration are loosening or fracture of abutments or screws. Such complications have serious consequences, and removal of fractured abutments or screws is difficult. There are various methods to remove fractured abutment screws in implants with screwed-in connections. However, no approach has been reported to retrieve solid abutments in implants with a locking-taper implant-abutment connection, which are rarely observed in clinical settings. This study presents the case of a 62-year-old male patient with a fractured abutment in an upper-right second premolar implant. Abutment fracture is a common mechanical complication after dental implantation. Parafunctional habits and occlusal overloading may generate excessive occlusal forces, which increase the risk of mechanical complications. This report presents a series of emergency procedures for removing a fractured solid abutment and fabricating a new prosthesis to restore the edentulous area. In this retrospective analysis, the authors deeply consider the whole treatment, through which the deficiencies of the treatment are noted, and corresponding future directions are discussed. This case report presents a convenient approach to removing a solid abutment in a sudden emergency, discusses possible reasons for solid abutment fractures, designs a new rescue kit for easy retrieval of such abutments and summarizes a valid solution for removing fractured solid abutments.

Influence of crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic designs on the clinical conditions of short implants in posterior regions: A 4-year retrospective clinical and radiographic study

BACKGROUND

Short implants (intra-bony length ≤ 8 mm) are generally considered as an alternative to bone augmentation in challenging situations; however, clinical evidence from large-scale studies with long follow-up regarding the application of short implants remains deficient.

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to assess the mid-term clinical outcomes of short implants supporting fixed prostheses in the posterior region, and to investigate the effects of the crown-to-implant ratio (C/I), and other patient-, implant-, prosthesis-relevant factors on the clinical conditions around short implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

180 Thommen short implants in 130 partially edentulous patients were enrolled in the study after 3 to 7 (mean 4.2) years of follow-up. Potential risk factors (patient sex and age, implant diameter and location, splinted vs single-tooth restorations, retention mode, anatomical and clinical C/I ratios) were evaluated according to the following outcomes: Implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), and mechanical and biological complications.

RESULTS

In total, four implants in four patients failed as a result of peri-implantitis. The cumulative survival rate was 97.8% for implant-based analysis. The peri-implant MBL around 180 short implants was 0.90 ± 0.78 mm. The mean clinical C/I ratio was 1.16 ± 0.36. Correlation analysis revealed that the influence of the clinical C/I ratio and patient age were significant for MBL (P < .05), whereas other potential risk factors showed no significant association with the outcome. Among 180 short implants, 24 cases (13.3%) had biological complications and 32 cases (17.8%) had mechanical complications, respectively. Peri-implant MBL and complication rates around splinted and non-splinted implants were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this study, short implants supporting fixed prostheses in the posterior region achieved predictable clinical outcomes over a 3 to 7 year period. Within the range of 0.47 to 3.01, the higher the C/I ratio, the less the peri-implant MBL.

Occlusal overload with dental implants: a review

Controversy persists as to the role of occlusal overload in peri-implantitis. Animal studies have not revealed the biological threshold for fatigue failure in the peri-implant bone. On the other hand, clinical studies have demonstrated a link between parafunction and implant failure, although variables such as intensity and frequency of loads, as well as bone density, have led to different outcomes. The absence of specific engineering “building codes” for the clinician has relegated prosthetic design planning to intuitive guidelines for all patients. For example, higher crown to implant ratios (2–3:1), implant cantilever prostheses and non-splinted restorative designs have been avoided because of the concern for overload. However, evidence has not supported this general approach. A call for preclinical research to establish specific patient load thresholds is in order to establish a customized treatment plan.

Short vs. Standard Laser-Microgrooved Implants Supporting Single and Splinted Crowns: A Prospective Study with 3 Years Follow-Up

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare survival rates, marginal bone loss (MBL), and peri-implant soft tissue parameters between short and standard laser-microgrooved implants supporting single or splinted crowns 3 years after loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

30 subjects received 1 short ( ≤ 7 mm ) and 1 standard length ( ≥ 9 mm ) laser-microgrooved implant in adjacent sites of the premolar and molar regions of the mandible or maxilla. Peri-implant soft tissue parameters and intraoral radiographs were recorded at the delivery of definitive crowns (baseline) and 3 years later. Cumulative survival rate (CSR) and marginal bone loss (MBL) in relation to crown/implant (C/I) ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design (single or splinted), were evaluated.

RESULTS

CSR of short implants was 98%, compared to 100% for standard implants, without significant statistical difference. MBL was not significantly different over the observation period, with an average of 0.23 ± 0.6 mm and 0.27 ± 0.3 mm for short and standard implants, respectively. No statistical differences were found between short and standard implants regarding plaque (14.7% vs. 15.7%), number of sites BOP (8.3% vs. 5.9%), probing depth (1.13 ± 0.6 mm vs. 1.04 ± 0.8 mm), and mean mucosal recession (0.18 ± 0.3 mm vs. 0.22 ± 0.3 mm). Analyzing MBL in relation to the C/I ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design, no statistically significant differences were found.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of C/I ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design, short and standard laser-microgrooved implants had similar survival rates, MBL, and peri-implant soft tissue conditions over the observation period of 3 years.