Evaluation of the RB-RB/LB-LB mnemonic rule for recording optimally projected intraoral images of dental implants: an in vitro study

The impact of oral rehabilitation with implants in nutrition and quality of life: A questionnaire-based survey on self-perception

BACKGROUND

The association between tooth loss and masticatory problems may influence on food choices and consequently impact nutrition and quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate impact of oral rehabilitation with implants in nutrition and quality of life.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective study was performed. The Questionnaire for Healthy Habits (QHH) and the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) tools were used to assess nutrition and oral health status, respectively. Oral implants were placed and the adjacent the bone was radiographically assessed. The mean outcomes of the QHH between pre- and post-rehabilitation periods were assessed with the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test. The OHIP-14 was assessed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

The implant surfaces showed a significant bone loss after six and 24 months of rehabilitation (p<0.001). There was no significant change in the masticatory pattern of patients (p>0.05). Nevertheless, the patients perceived a significant reduction in discomfort (p<0.02) when eating, after 24 months of the rehabilitation.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings confirm the hypothesis that oral rehabilitation with implants may not trigger direct improvement in nutrition. However, it plays an especial role improving quality of life. Key words:Dentistry, nutrition, oral implants, quality of life.

Fate of the buccal bone at implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction analyzed by cone beam CT: 10-year results from a randomized, controlled, clinical study

AIM

To present 10-year cone beam CT (CBCT) data on the fate of buccal bone at single-tooth implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty-three of 72 patients, originally randomly allocated to three equal-size groups, received a single-tooth implant on average 10 days (Ea; N = 22), 3 months (De; N = 22), or 1.5 years (La; N = 19) after tooth extraction. Healing abutments were mounted after a 3-month period of submerged healing and metalceramic crowns were cemented after one additional month. At the second stage surgery, presence of buccal bone defects (dehiscences or intrabony) and their dimensions were registered. CBCT scans recorded with a Scanora(®) 3D unit and standardized periapical (PA) radiographs of the implants were obtained at the 10-year control. Interproximal bone levels (i.e., the distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact; BIC) measured in CBCT image sections and PA were compared, and the buccal bone level was determined in the CBCT images.

RESULTS

Two Ea and one De implants failed to osseointegrate. Forty-nine patients attended the 10-year control and due to poor quality of 5 CBCT scans, useful CBCT images were available from 44 patients (Ea:12, De:17, La:15). No significant differences between CBCT and PA images in measurements of the interproximal bone levels were observed. Ten years after implant placement, BIC at the buccal aspect was located on average 2 mm apically to the implant platform (2.39 ± 1.06 mm [median = 2.36] for Ea, 2.22 ± 0.99 mm [median = 2.16] for De, and 1.85 ± 0.65 mm [median = 1.95] for La implants) with no significant difference among the groups (P = 0.20). Mean buccal bone level (bBL) for implants with an intrabony or a dehiscence defect at second stage surgery was 2.51 ± 1.12 mm [median = 2.70] and 2.84 ± 0.70 mm [median = 2.79], respectively, while 1.78 ± 0.74 mm [median = 1.93] for the implants with no defect. The difference in bBL between the implants without a defect and those with a dehiscence was significant at 10 years (P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSION

Time of placement of single-tooth implants after tooth extraction did not significantly influence the peri-implant buccal bone level, while presence of a buccal bone dehiscence at second stage surgery resulted in significantly more apically located BIC buccally at 10 years.