A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival rate of implants placed in previously failed sites (original) (raw)
Related papers
Feasibility of Dental Implant Replacement in Failed Sites: A Systematic Review
The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants
To assess the clinical outcomes of replaced implants after removal of failed ones. In addition, associated risk factors that might affect the final outcome of these procedures were also explored. An electronic literature search was conducted by two reviewers in several databases for articles written in English up to November 2014. Human clinical trials with a minimum of 10 subjects enrolled that reported clinical outcomes with a mean follow-up period of at least 12 months after implant replacement were included. Implant survival and nonmodifiable/modifiable factors at second and third implant placement attempts were studied. Hence, the PICO question that was aimed to be addressed was: Do patients undergoing implant replacement (second and third attempts) in previous failed sites have comparable clinical outcomes by means of implant survival/failure rate to implants placed at the first attempt? Five retrospective clinical cohort studies and two case series satisfied the selection cri...
Dentistry journal, 2023
Objectives: To compare the impact of immediate and delayed implant placement upon the survival of implants and to investigate the differences in implant survival between immediate and delayed placement in adults. Methods: A search for the relevant literature was performed using the databases of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Scopus. The studies found were limited to publications between 2014 and 2022, written in the English language, peer-reviewed, and were randomised trials or comparative studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions appraisal tools and implant survival, and the primary outcome was meta-analysed using RevMan v.5.3. Results: A total of 10 studies were eligible for inclusion, including six randomised controlled trials and four nonrandomised comparative studies. Five of the six randomised trials observed a low risk of bias, while the comparative studies had a moderate-to-serious risk of bias. The search strategy resulted in 341 implants placed immediately into fresh extraction sites (332 survived, 97.4%) and 359 implants inserted into delayed sites (350 survived, 97.5%). Conclusion: The meta-analysis demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the implant survival rates between immediately placed implants and implants placed using a delayed timing protocol (risk ratio 0.99; 95% CI 0.96, 1.02, Z = 0.75, p = 0.45). However, the detailed analysis showed that slightly more implant failures happened in the immediate dental implant placement group, with survival rates in some studies ranging between 90 and 95%, while the delayed placement group had survival rates of more than 95%.
Survival of dental implants at sites after implant failure: A systematic review
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2019
Implants are widely used to support dental prostheses, consistent with their overall high survival rate. 1,2 Nevertheless, the high survival rate of implants has hampered efforts to identify specific risk factors for implant failures. Early implant failures typically occur before or at the abutment connection and are generally associated with minor peri-implant bone loss. 3 Late implant failures, in contrast, occur after occlusal loading and are often associated with extensive peri-implant bone loss. 3 Available evidence suggests that early failure rates (0.76% to 7.47%) are somewhat lower than late (5 to 10 years) implant failure rates (2.1% to 11.3%). 4,5 Early implant failures have been commonly attributed to altered or poor wound healing, which impedes or prevents osseointegration. Additional factors, such as variation in surgical technique, poor bone quality, postoperative infection and inflammation, and occlusal overload, have been implicated in early implant failures. 2,6-10 Late implant failures typically result from a breakdown in osseointegration, often after functional loading of the implant-supported prosthesis. Late implant failures have been generally attributed to occlusal (biomechanical) overload or periimplantitis 3,11,12 ; however, the biological basis for late implant failures remains largely unknown. As with chronic periodontitis and tooth loss, implant failures show some evidence of clustering (occurrence of multiple implant failures) in selected patients and patient populations.
Risk Factors in Early Implant Failure: A Meta-Analysis
Implant dentistry, 2016
Clinicians should be able to weigh the role of the main risk factors associated with early implant failure. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the influence of different patient-related and implant-related risk factors on the occurrence of early implant failure. In July, 2014 the main electronic databases were searched for studies reporting on early failures. Relevant papers were selected by 2 independent authors using predefined selection criteria. Three authors independently scored the included studies for quality assessment. The estimated odds ratios of the main risk factors from the selected papers were subjected to meta-analysis. Nine studies were included. A total of 18,171 implants were meta-analyzed, of which 10,921 were analyzed for smoking, 15,260 for implant diameter, 16,075 for implant length, and 16,711 for implant location (maxilla vs mandible). The main significant risk factors for early implant failures were the smoking habit (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% confi...
Journal of Oral Medicine and Oral Surgery
Introduction: The purpose of this monocentric retrospective observational investigation is to evaluate the implant failure rate observed in an oral surgery department and analyze the risk factors associated with them. Preventative measures will be suggested to reduce the incidence of implant failure. Material and method: All implants removed between 2014 and 2020 were analyzed. The main criterion assessed was the overall failure rate over 6 years of activity;the secondary criteria were the risk factors associated with implant failure. Results: 12 out of 376 implants placed between 2014 and 2019 in 11 patients (mean age: 55.5 ±11.5 years);sex ratio M/F=5/6) were removed, for an overall failure rate of 3.11%. The majority, 83% (10/12) of the lost implants, were in the maxilla, while only 17% (2/12) were placed in the mandible. The main risk factors identified were: a III−IV bone type density (75%, 9/12), pre-implant sinus lift surgery (42%, 5/12) smoking (8.3%, 1/12), surgical site in...
Risk Factors related to Late Failure of Dental Implant—A Systematic Review of Recent Studies
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Resolving late failure of dental implant is difficult and costly; however, only few reviews have addressed the risk factors associated with late failure of dental implant. The aim of this literature review was to summarize the influences of different potential risk factors on the incidence of late dental implant failure. The protocol of this systematic review was prepared and implemented based on the PRISMA (Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guideline. In December 2018, studies published within the previous 10 years on late dental implant failure were selected by fulfilling the eligibility criteria and the risk factors identified in qualified studies were extracted by using a predefined extraction template. Fourteen eligible studies were assessed. The common risk factors for late failure were divided into three groups according to whether they were related to (1) the patient history (radiation therapy, periodontitis, bruxism and early implant failur...
Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2014
Rehabilitation of the incomplete dentition by means of osseointegrated dental implants represents a highly predictable and widespread therapy; however, little is known about potential risk factors that may impair long-term implant success. From 2004 to 2012, a total of 13,147 implants were placed in 4,316 patients at the Academy for Oral Implantology in Vienna. The survival rates after 8 years of follow-up were computed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the impact of patient- and implant-related risk factors was assessed. Overall implant survival was 97% and was not associated with implant length (P=0.930), implant diameter (P=0.704), jaw location (P=0.545), implant position (P=0.450), local bone quality (P=0.398), previous bone augmentation surgery (P=0.617), or patient-related factors including osteoporosis (P=0.661), age (P=0.575), or diabetes mellitus (P=0.928). However, smoking increased the risk of implant failure by 3 folds (P<0.001) and a positive history of periodontal ...
Systematic review of survival rates for immediately loaded dental implants
The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry, 2006
The primary goal of this paper was to determine the survival rate of immediately loaded (IL) dental implants based on a systematic review of the literature. Secondary goals were to determine the influence of several factors on the implant survival rate, such as the type of reconstruction, implant location, and implant surface characteristics. An electronic search of databases was performed, in addition to a hand search of the most relevant journals. All relevant articles were independently screened according to specific inclusion criteria. The selected papers were reviewed. The literature search yielded 270 applicable articles up to December 2005. Of these, 71 met the inclusion criteria for qualitative data analysis. Eight articles were randomized controlled trials. The overall implant survival rate for the included studies was 96.39%. The database included 10,491 IL implants placed in 2,977 patients, with a maximum follow-up of 13 years. IL is well documented and predictable for th...