Implant loading protocols for the partially edentulous esthetic zone.
ABSTRACT The scientific evidence related to different or novel implant loading (primary objective) and directly associated implant placement (secondary objective) protocols developed for the anterior maxillae of partially edentulous patients was reviewed.
A comprehensive search of electronic databases and a hand search of six relevant journals was performed. The principal outcome variables were implant survival, implant success, and esthetic appearance. Concerning esthetic treatment outcomes, articles were specifically screened for the presence of objective evaluation parameters and patient satisfaction assessment.
The analysis of the literature on immediately restored or conventionally loaded implants in the esthetic zone revealed an initial survival rate of 97.3% after 1 year (10 prospective cohort studies and one case series). For periods of 1 to 5 years, the survival rate was 96.7%. These survival rates are consistent with previous reports on more traditional loading modalities. However, for immediately placed implants with immediate restoration and occlusal loading, the survival rate dropped by approximately 10% (four studies). Success criteria such as stable crestal bone levels, soft tissue recession, and probing depth could not be evaluated on the basis of the available literature.
There is a paucity of prospective cohort studies addressing patient-centered outcomes. No parameters specific to immediate loading protocols were available for evaluation. In order to validate or reject such implant protocols for use in the esthetically sensitive anterior maxilla, long-term clinical trials should routinely include objective esthetic criteria that comprehensively embrace the pertinent elements of "pink and white esthetics" in the form of readily used indices.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the 5- and 10-year survival of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and to describe the incidence of biological and technical complications. An electronic Medline search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case series on FDPs with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Patients had to have been examined clinically at the follow-up visit. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using standard and random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year and 10-year survival and complication rates. The updated search provided 979 titles and 257 abstracts. Full-text analysis was performed for 90 articles resulting in a total 32 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of these studies indicated an estimated survival of implants supporting FDPs of 95.6% after 5 years and 93.1% after 10 years. When machined surface implants were excluded from the analysis and only rough surface implants included, the survival rate increased to 97.2% after 5 years. The survival rate of implant-supported FDPs was 95.4% after 5 years and 80.1% after 10 years of function. When the analysis was done exclusively for metal-ceramic FDPs, hence the old gold-acrylic FDPs were excluded, the survival rate increased significantly. The survival rate of metal-ceramic implant-supported FDPs was 96.4% after 5 years and 93.9% after 10 years. Only 66.4% of the patients were free of any complications after 5 years. The most frequent complications over the 5-year observation period were fractures of the veneering material (13.5%), peri-implantitis and soft tissue complications (8.5%), loss of access hole restoration (5.4%), abutment or screw loosening (5.3%), and loss of retention of cemented FDPs (4.7%). It may be concluded that implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) are a safe and predictable treatment method with high survival rates. However, biological and technical complications were frequent (33.6%). To minimize the incidence of complications, dental professionals should make great effort in choosing reliable components and materials for implant-supported FDPs and the patients should be placed in well-structured maintenance system after treatment.Clinical Oral Implants Research 10/2012; 23 Suppl 6:22-38. · 3.43 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aim of this article is to review the current literature with regard to prosthetic considerations and their influence on the outcome of immediately loaded implants. A broad search of the published literature was performed using MEDLINE and PubMed to identify pertinent articles. One hundred fifty six references were selected. They were mainly descriptive, prospective, follow-up studies. They were reviewed and were categorized with respect to 6 factors that influence immediate loading: cross-arch stability and micromovements, interim prostheses, definitive restorations inserted immediately, screw- or cement-retained prostheses, occlusion, and number and distribution of implants in overdentures and fixed prostheses. Immediate loading seems to be a relatively safe procedure. From the prosthodontic point of view, there are specific guidelines to follow. They are: implants should be splinted with a metallic bar and acrylic interim prostheses until full osseointegration occurs. To have a successful outcome, screw-retained interim prostheses are recommended. CAD/CAM systems can improve the placement of implants with minimum risk. Regarding occlusion, there is a disagreement on when and how to provide occlusal contacts, but all authors agree on keeping centric contacts only. Finally, concerning the number of implants required for an immediate overdenture, no conclusive evidence could be found.Journal of Prosthodontics 02/2012; 21(2):141-54. · 0.68 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Immediate loading of oral implants has become popular because of the increasing demands of a shortened treatment time. This literature review evaluates the prognosis of immediately loaded implants and their restorations with immediate or delayed implant placement. Special attention was given to the impact of type of jaw, bone quality, implant length, time of implant placement and type of restoration. An electronic (PubMed) and a manual search in relevant journals were conducted until February 2012. Only publications in English, in peer-reviewed journals, were considered. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria: five studies dealt with fixed restorations, two studies with removable rehabilitation of edentulous jaws and two studies dealt with partially edentulous patients. Implant survival rates ranged from 95·8% to 100%, implant success rates in the treatment for the mandible from 79% to 100% and restoration survival rates for both jaws from 96·4% to 100%. Within the limits of this review, appropriate patient selection, primary implant stability, splinting of implants and the expertise of surgeons seem to be important for the prognosis of immediately loaded implants and their restorations. Good bone quality and use of long implants appear to play a role. However, careful interpretation is required because conclusions are based on articles with low level of evidence. While immediate loading of oral implants in the mandible shows encouraging and predictable results, further multicenter randomised controlled clinical trials with sufficient statistical power are needed to examine (i) the outcome of immediately loaded implants in the maxilla and (ii) the outcome of immediate loading of immediately placed implants.Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 05/2012; 39(9):704-17. · 2.34 Impact Factor