Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Long-term follow-up of turned single implants placed in periodontally healthy patients after 16–22 years: radiographic and peri-implant outcome
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1004-0279
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 23, no 2, p. 197-204Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objectives: Retrospectively evaluate the survival, radiographic and peri-implant outcome of single turned Brånemark™ implants after at least 16 years. Materials and methods: From 134 patients (C-group), 101 could be contacted concerning implant survival and 50 (59 remaining implants) were clinically examined (I-group). Marginal bone level was radiographically measured from the implant–abutment junction at baseline (=within 6 months after abutment connection) and 1–4, 5–8 and 16–22 years post-operatively. Probing depth, gingival and plaque index were measured. Marginal bone-level changes were analyzed using Friedman's and Wilcoxon's signed ranks tests. Spearman's correlations between radiographic and clinical parameters were calculated. Results: In the C-group, 13 out of 166 implants in 11 out of 134 patients failed (CSR=91.5%). In the I-group (28 males–22 females; mean age 23.9 years at baseline; range 14–57), the mean follow-up was 18.4 years (range 16–22). The mean bone level was 1.7±0.88 mm (range −0.8 to 5) after 16–22 years. Changes in the mean marginal bone level were statistically significant between baseline and the second measuring interval (1–4 years). Thereafter, no significant differences could be demonstrated. The mean interproximal probing depth, gingival and plaque indices were 3.9±1.27 mm, 1.2±0.81 and 0.2±0.48, respectively. Probing depth was moderately correlated with gingival inflammation (r=0.6; P<0.001) but not with bone level (P>0.05). 81.4% of the implants had a bone level ≤2nd thread and 91.5% had a probing depth ≤5 mm. 76.3% had both bone level ≤2nd thread and probing depth ≤5 mm. Conclusions and clinical implications: The single turned Brånemark™ implant is a predictable solution with high clinical survival and success rates. In general, a steady-state bone level can be expected over decades, with minimal signs of peri-implant disease. A minority (5%), however, presents with progressive bone loss.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Vol. 23, no 2, p. 197-204
Keywords [en]
dental implants, implant success, implant survival, marginal bone loss, peri-implantitis, single tooth
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6912DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02212.xISI: 000299098700009PubMedID: 21732984Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84855948676Local ID: 15657OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6912DiVA, id: diva2:1403866
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Vandeweghe, StefanKisch, JenöNilner, Krister

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Vandeweghe, StefanKisch, JenöNilner, Krister
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 47 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf