Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate, success rate and primary complications associated with mandibular fixed implant‐supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers over 5 years of function. Material and methods: In this prospective multi‐center trial, 45 fully...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2009-06, Vol.20 (6), p.601-607 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 607 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 601 |
| container_title | Clinical oral implants research |
| container_volume | 20 |
| creator | Gallucci, German O. Doughtie, Camden B. Hwang, Jae Woong Fiorellini, Joseph P. Weber, Hans-Peter |
| description | Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate, success rate and primary complications associated with mandibular fixed implant‐supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers over 5 years of function.
Material and methods: In this prospective multi‐center trial, 45 fully edentulous patients were treated with implant‐supported mandibular hybrid prostheses with distal extension cantilevers. Data were collected at numerous time points, including but not limited to: implant placement, abutment placement, final prosthesis delivery, 3 months and 5 years post‐loading. Biological, implant and prosthetic parameters defining survival and success were evaluated for each implant including: sulcus bleeding ndex (SBI) at four sites per implant, width of facial and lingual keratinized gingiva (mm), peri‐implant mucosal level (mid‐facial from the top of the implant collar, measured in mm), modified plaque index (MPI) at four sites per implant, mobility and peri‐implant radiolucency. Survival was defined as implants or prostheses that did not need to be replaced. Success rate was defined as meeting well‐established criteria that were chosen to indicate healthy peri‐implant mucosa osseointegration, prostheses success and complications.
Results: A total of 237 implants in 45 completely edentulous patients were included in the study. In each patient, four to six implants were placed to support hybrid prostheses with distal cantilevers. Cantilevers ranged in length from 6 to 21 mm, with an average length of 15.6 mm. The ages of the patients ranged from 34 to 78 with a mean age of 59.5 years. The survival rate of implants was 100% (237/237) and for prostheses 95.5% (43/45). The overall treatment success rate was calculated as 86.7% (39/45). Of the six patients that have not met the criteria for success, two patients required replacement of the entire prosthesis and four patients presented >four complications events.
Conclusion: Fixed implant‐supported rehabilitation with distal cantilever resulted in a reliable treatment modality over the 5‐year observation period. Although biological parameters of MPI, SBI, keratinized tissue and peri‐implant mucosal levels showed statistically significant differences over time, the mean values for each patient remained within the normal limits of oral health. Complications were categorized as biological or technical. The majority of complications were technical complications (54/79) and of these most involved fract |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01699.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67358051</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>20658775</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4369-736f6b4caeca8ec2cad499c378d8ce611ff563bbe477b72e14dad14ec6a6cf2d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS0EotPCX0BesUuw8_BjwQKNaIuYFqm8pG4sx77ReEgmqe20M_--DjMqS-qNLfs79_qegxCmJKdpfdjklBGSkZrQvCBE5IQyKfPdC7R4eniJFkSSOuOU0RN0GsKGEMKkkK_RCZUlKUohF2g8d_eQ7UF77CFMXQx4aHHrdmCx68dOb2MWpnEcfEw3Hta6cZ2LOrphG_CDi2tsXYi6wyahroN78AG3g8dxDRgsbOPUDVPAvd5a13TwBr1qdRfg7XE_Qz_PP_9YXmarbxdflp9WmalKJjNespY1ldFgtABTGG0rKU3JhRUGGKVtW7OyaaDivOEF0MpqSyswTDPTFrY8Q-8PdUc_3E0QoupdMNCliSD9RzFe1oLU9L9gQVgtOK8TKA6g8UMIHlo1etdrv1eUqDkWtVGz-2p2X82xqL-xqF2Svjv2mJoe7D_hMYcEfDwAD8nC_bMLq-XqZj4lfXbQpyxg96TX_s88KK_V7-sLdXu1vF19v_ylvpaPk1uurg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20658775</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Gallucci, German O. ; Doughtie, Camden B. ; Hwang, Jae Woong ; Fiorellini, Joseph P. ; Weber, Hans-Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>Gallucci, German O. ; Doughtie, Camden B. ; Hwang, Jae Woong ; Fiorellini, Joseph P. ; Weber, Hans-Peter</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate, success rate and primary complications associated with mandibular fixed implant‐supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers over 5 years of function.
Material and methods: In this prospective multi‐center trial, 45 fully edentulous patients were treated with implant‐supported mandibular hybrid prostheses with distal extension cantilevers. Data were collected at numerous time points, including but not limited to: implant placement, abutment placement, final prosthesis delivery, 3 months and 5 years post‐loading. Biological, implant and prosthetic parameters defining survival and success were evaluated for each implant including: sulcus bleeding ndex (SBI) at four sites per implant, width of facial and lingual keratinized gingiva (mm), peri‐implant mucosal level (mid‐facial from the top of the implant collar, measured in mm), modified plaque index (MPI) at four sites per implant, mobility and peri‐implant radiolucency. Survival was defined as implants or prostheses that did not need to be replaced. Success rate was defined as meeting well‐established criteria that were chosen to indicate healthy peri‐implant mucosa osseointegration, prostheses success and complications.
Results: A total of 237 implants in 45 completely edentulous patients were included in the study. In each patient, four to six implants were placed to support hybrid prostheses with distal cantilevers. Cantilevers ranged in length from 6 to 21 mm, with an average length of 15.6 mm. The ages of the patients ranged from 34 to 78 with a mean age of 59.5 years. The survival rate of implants was 100% (237/237) and for prostheses 95.5% (43/45). The overall treatment success rate was calculated as 86.7% (39/45). Of the six patients that have not met the criteria for success, two patients required replacement of the entire prosthesis and four patients presented >four complications events.
Conclusion: Fixed implant‐supported rehabilitation with distal cantilever resulted in a reliable treatment modality over the 5‐year observation period. Although biological parameters of MPI, SBI, keratinized tissue and peri‐implant mucosal levels showed statistically significant differences over time, the mean values for each patient remained within the normal limits of oral health. Complications were categorized as biological or technical. The majority of complications were technical complications (54/79) and of these most involved fracture of the acrylic teeth and base (20/54). While the survival rate was 100% for implants and 95.5% for prostheses, the application of strict criteria for treatment success resulted in an overall treatment success rate of 86.7%.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0905-7161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01699.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19302389</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Dental Abutments ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - instrumentation ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods ; Dental Implants ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported ; Dentistry ; Denture Design ; Denture Retention - instrumentation ; Denture, Complete, Lower ; edentulous jaws ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; hybrid prostheses ; Jaw, Edentulous - rehabilitation ; Male ; Mandible ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; success criteria ; Survival Analysis</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral implants research, 2009-06, Vol.20 (6), p.601-607</ispartof><rights>2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4369-736f6b4caeca8ec2cad499c378d8ce611ff563bbe477b72e14dad14ec6a6cf2d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4369-736f6b4caeca8ec2cad499c378d8ce611ff563bbe477b72e14dad14ec6a6cf2d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2008.01699.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1600-0501.2008.01699.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19302389$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gallucci, German O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doughtie, Camden B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Jae Woong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorellini, Joseph P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weber, Hans-Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible</title><title>Clinical oral implants research</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><description>Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate, success rate and primary complications associated with mandibular fixed implant‐supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers over 5 years of function.
Material and methods: In this prospective multi‐center trial, 45 fully edentulous patients were treated with implant‐supported mandibular hybrid prostheses with distal extension cantilevers. Data were collected at numerous time points, including but not limited to: implant placement, abutment placement, final prosthesis delivery, 3 months and 5 years post‐loading. Biological, implant and prosthetic parameters defining survival and success were evaluated for each implant including: sulcus bleeding ndex (SBI) at four sites per implant, width of facial and lingual keratinized gingiva (mm), peri‐implant mucosal level (mid‐facial from the top of the implant collar, measured in mm), modified plaque index (MPI) at four sites per implant, mobility and peri‐implant radiolucency. Survival was defined as implants or prostheses that did not need to be replaced. Success rate was defined as meeting well‐established criteria that were chosen to indicate healthy peri‐implant mucosa osseointegration, prostheses success and complications.
Results: A total of 237 implants in 45 completely edentulous patients were included in the study. In each patient, four to six implants were placed to support hybrid prostheses with distal cantilevers. Cantilevers ranged in length from 6 to 21 mm, with an average length of 15.6 mm. The ages of the patients ranged from 34 to 78 with a mean age of 59.5 years. The survival rate of implants was 100% (237/237) and for prostheses 95.5% (43/45). The overall treatment success rate was calculated as 86.7% (39/45). Of the six patients that have not met the criteria for success, two patients required replacement of the entire prosthesis and four patients presented >four complications events.
Conclusion: Fixed implant‐supported rehabilitation with distal cantilever resulted in a reliable treatment modality over the 5‐year observation period. Although biological parameters of MPI, SBI, keratinized tissue and peri‐implant mucosal levels showed statistically significant differences over time, the mean values for each patient remained within the normal limits of oral health. Complications were categorized as biological or technical. The majority of complications were technical complications (54/79) and of these most involved fracture of the acrylic teeth and base (20/54). While the survival rate was 100% for implants and 95.5% for prostheses, the application of strict criteria for treatment success resulted in an overall treatment success rate of 86.7%.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Dental Abutments</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - instrumentation</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</subject><subject>Dental Implants</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Denture Design</subject><subject>Denture Retention - instrumentation</subject><subject>Denture, Complete, Lower</subject><subject>edentulous jaws</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>hybrid prostheses</subject><subject>Jaw, Edentulous - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mandible</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>success criteria</subject><subject>Survival Analysis</subject><issn>0905-7161</issn><issn>1600-0501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1DAUhS0EotPCX0BesUuw8_BjwQKNaIuYFqm8pG4sx77ReEgmqe20M_--DjMqS-qNLfs79_qegxCmJKdpfdjklBGSkZrQvCBE5IQyKfPdC7R4eniJFkSSOuOU0RN0GsKGEMKkkK_RCZUlKUohF2g8d_eQ7UF77CFMXQx4aHHrdmCx68dOb2MWpnEcfEw3Hta6cZ2LOrphG_CDi2tsXYi6wyahroN78AG3g8dxDRgsbOPUDVPAvd5a13TwBr1qdRfg7XE_Qz_PP_9YXmarbxdflp9WmalKJjNespY1ldFgtABTGG0rKU3JhRUGGKVtW7OyaaDivOEF0MpqSyswTDPTFrY8Q-8PdUc_3E0QoupdMNCliSD9RzFe1oLU9L9gQVgtOK8TKA6g8UMIHlo1etdrv1eUqDkWtVGz-2p2X82xqL-xqF2Svjv2mJoe7D_hMYcEfDwAD8nC_bMLq-XqZj4lfXbQpyxg96TX_s88KK_V7-sLdXu1vF19v_ylvpaPk1uurg</recordid><startdate>200906</startdate><enddate>200906</enddate><creator>Gallucci, German O.</creator><creator>Doughtie, Camden B.</creator><creator>Hwang, Jae Woong</creator><creator>Fiorellini, Joseph P.</creator><creator>Weber, Hans-Peter</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200906</creationdate><title>Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible</title><author>Gallucci, German O. ; Doughtie, Camden B. ; Hwang, Jae Woong ; Fiorellini, Joseph P. ; Weber, Hans-Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4369-736f6b4caeca8ec2cad499c378d8ce611ff563bbe477b72e14dad14ec6a6cf2d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Dental Abutments</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - instrumentation</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</topic><topic>Dental Implants</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Denture Design</topic><topic>Denture Retention - instrumentation</topic><topic>Denture, Complete, Lower</topic><topic>edentulous jaws</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>hybrid prostheses</topic><topic>Jaw, Edentulous - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mandible</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>success criteria</topic><topic>Survival Analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gallucci, German O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doughtie, Camden B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hwang, Jae Woong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorellini, Joseph P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weber, Hans-Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gallucci, German O.</au><au>Doughtie, Camden B.</au><au>Hwang, Jae Woong</au><au>Fiorellini, Joseph P.</au><au>Weber, Hans-Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><date>2009-06</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>601</spage><epage>607</epage><pages>601-607</pages><issn>0905-7161</issn><eissn>1600-0501</eissn><abstract>Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival rate, success rate and primary complications associated with mandibular fixed implant‐supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers over 5 years of function.
Material and methods: In this prospective multi‐center trial, 45 fully edentulous patients were treated with implant‐supported mandibular hybrid prostheses with distal extension cantilevers. Data were collected at numerous time points, including but not limited to: implant placement, abutment placement, final prosthesis delivery, 3 months and 5 years post‐loading. Biological, implant and prosthetic parameters defining survival and success were evaluated for each implant including: sulcus bleeding ndex (SBI) at four sites per implant, width of facial and lingual keratinized gingiva (mm), peri‐implant mucosal level (mid‐facial from the top of the implant collar, measured in mm), modified plaque index (MPI) at four sites per implant, mobility and peri‐implant radiolucency. Survival was defined as implants or prostheses that did not need to be replaced. Success rate was defined as meeting well‐established criteria that were chosen to indicate healthy peri‐implant mucosa osseointegration, prostheses success and complications.
Results: A total of 237 implants in 45 completely edentulous patients were included in the study. In each patient, four to six implants were placed to support hybrid prostheses with distal cantilevers. Cantilevers ranged in length from 6 to 21 mm, with an average length of 15.6 mm. The ages of the patients ranged from 34 to 78 with a mean age of 59.5 years. The survival rate of implants was 100% (237/237) and for prostheses 95.5% (43/45). The overall treatment success rate was calculated as 86.7% (39/45). Of the six patients that have not met the criteria for success, two patients required replacement of the entire prosthesis and four patients presented >four complications events.
Conclusion: Fixed implant‐supported rehabilitation with distal cantilever resulted in a reliable treatment modality over the 5‐year observation period. Although biological parameters of MPI, SBI, keratinized tissue and peri‐implant mucosal levels showed statistically significant differences over time, the mean values for each patient remained within the normal limits of oral health. Complications were categorized as biological or technical. The majority of complications were technical complications (54/79) and of these most involved fracture of the acrylic teeth and base (20/54). While the survival rate was 100% for implants and 95.5% for prostheses, the application of strict criteria for treatment success resulted in an overall treatment success rate of 86.7%.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>19302389</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01699.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0905-7161 |
| ispartof | Clinical oral implants research, 2009-06, Vol.20 (6), p.601-607 |
| issn | 0905-7161 1600-0501 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67358051 |
| source | Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; MEDLINE |
| subjects | Aged Dental Abutments Dental Implantation, Endosseous - instrumentation Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods Dental Implants Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported Dentistry Denture Design Denture Retention - instrumentation Denture, Complete, Lower edentulous jaws Female Follow-Up Studies Humans hybrid prostheses Jaw, Edentulous - rehabilitation Male Mandible Middle Aged Prospective Studies success criteria Survival Analysis |
| title | Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T09%3A30%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Five-year%20results%20of%20fixed%20implant-supported%20rehabilitations%20with%20distal%20cantilevers%20for%20the%20edentulous%20mandible&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20implants%20research&rft.au=Gallucci,%20German%20O.&rft.date=2009-06&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=601&rft.epage=607&rft.pages=601-607&rft.issn=0905-7161&rft.eissn=1600-0501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01699.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20658775%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20658775&rft_id=info:pmid/19302389&rfr_iscdi=true |