Search

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of 1-stage versus 2-stage lateral maxillary sinus lift procedures. Materials and methods: Sixty partially edentulous patients requiring 1 to 3 implants and having 1 to 3 mm of residual bone height and at least 5 mm of bone width below the maxillary sinus, as measured on CT scans, were randomised into two equal groups to receive either a 1-stage lateral window sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement or a 2-stage procedure with implant placement delayed by 4 months using a bone substitute in 3 different centres. Implants were submerged for 4 months and loaded with reinforced provisional prostheses, which were replaced, after 4 months, by definitive prostheses. Outcome measures were augmentation procedure failures, prosthesis failures, implant failures, complications and marginal peri-implant bone loss assessed by a blinded outcome assessor. Patients were followed up to 4 months after loading. Only data of implants placed in 1 to 3 mm of bone height were reported. Results: Two patients dropped out from the 1-stage group and none from the 2-stage group. No sinus lift procedure failed in the 1-stage group but 1 failed in the 2-stage group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 1.00). Two prostheses failed or could not be placed in the planned time in the 1-stage group and 1 in the 2-stage group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.51). Three implants failed in 3 patients of the 1-stage group versus 1 implant in the 2-stage group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.28). Two complications occurred in the 1-stage group and 1 in the 2-stage group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.61). There were no statistically significant differences in bone loss between groups at loading (0.05mm). Sites treated in 1 stage lost an average of 0.56mm (SD: 0.36; 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.42; P < 0.001) of peri-implant bone and 2-stage sites approximately 0.61 mm (SD: 0.34; 95% CI: -0.74 to -0.48; P < 0.001). Conclusions: No statistically significant differences were observed between implants placed according to 1- or 2-stage sinus lift procedures. However, this study may suggest that in patients having a residual bone height between 1 and 3 mm below the maxillary sinus there might be a slightly higher risk for implant failures when performing a 1-stage lateral sinus lift procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate clinical safety and effectiveness of a novel calcium-incorporated titanium implant (Xpeed, MegaGen Implant Co. Limited, Gyeongbuk, South Korea). Materials and methods: Sixty patients were randomised to receive either 1 to 6 calcium-incorporated or control titanium implants in the maxilla according to a parallel group design at 2 different centres. Implants were submerged and exposed at 3 different endpoints in equal groups of 20 patients each at 12, 10 and 8 weeks, respectively. Within 2 weeks, implants were functionally loaded with provisional or definitive prostheses. Outcome measures were prosthesis failures, implant failures, any complications and peri-implant marginal bone level changes. Results: Thirty patients received 45 calcium-incorporated implants and 30 patients received 42 control titanium implants. One year after loading, no drop-outs and no prosthesis or implant failures occurred. There were no statistically significant differences between groups for complications (P = 0.61; difference in proportions = -0.27; 95% CI -0.71 to 0.18) and mean marginal bone level changes (P = 0.64; mean difference -0.04 mm; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.13). Conclusions: Nanostructured calcium-incorporated titanium implants seem to be at least as effective and safe as conventional titanium implants. Conflict-of-interest statement: MegaGen partially supported this trial and donated the implants and prosthetic components. The study design was negotiated with MegaGen Implant Co. Limited, Gyeongbuk, South Korea, however, the data was the sole property of the authors and by no means did MegaGen interfere with the conduct of the trial or the publication of its results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate whether the adjunctive use of a bone substitute at immediate single implants placed in fresh extraction sockets with a residual buccal bone-to-implant gap of at least 1 mm could improve the aesthetic outcome of guided bone regeneration (GBR). Materials and methods: Eighty patients requiring bone augmentation at a single immediate post-extractive implant to improve the aesthetic outcome were randomly allocated to an augmentation procedure using a resorbable barrier alone (GBR group; 40 patients) or a bone substitute plus a resorbable barrier (GBR + BS group; 40 patients) according to a parallel group design at four different centres. Three to 4 months after implant placement/augmentation, implants were loaded with provisional or definitive single crowns. Outcome measures were implant failures, complications, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES), patient satisfaction and peri-implant marginal bone levels, recorded by blinded assessors. All patients were followed up to 1 year after loading.Results: One patient dropped out from the GBR group. Seven (9%) implants failed: 2 (5%) in the GBR + BS group and 5 (12.5%) in the GBR group. Six minor complications occurred in the GBR +BS group versus 2 in the GBR group. These differences were not statistically significant. Just after implant placement/augmentation, mean bone levels were -0.21 mm at GBR + BS implants and -1.92mm at GBR implants whereas at 1 year after loading they were -1.04 and -1.76, respectively. When comparing the two groups, GBR + BS implants had 0.70 mm more peri-implant marginal bone than GBR implants. Aesthetics was scored by a blinded assessor as statistically significantly better for the GBR + BS group. Patients were equally satisfied. There were no differences between centres regarding the clinical outcomes.Conclusions: The use of additional an organic bovine bone substitute (Endobon) with resorbable collagen barriers (OsseoGuard) in defects around post-extractive implant improves the aesthetic outcome, though single post-extractive implants might be at a higher risk for implant failures [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate whether 6.3 mm-long implants could be a suitable alternative to longer implants placed in vertically augmented atrophic posterior mandibles.Materials and methods: Sixty partially edentulous patients having 7 to 8 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5.5 mm thickness measured on CT scans above the mandibular canal were randomised according to a parallel group design either to receive 1 to 3 submerged 6.3 mm-long implants or 9.3 mm or longer implants (30 patients per group) placed in vertically augmented bone. Bone was augmented with interpositional an organic bovine bone blocks covered by resorbable barriers. Grafts were left to heal for 5 months before implant placement. Four months later, provisional acrylic prostheses were delivered, and were then replaced after another 4 months by definitive metal-ceramic prostheses.Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level changes. All patients were followed up to 3 years after loading.Results: Four patients dropped out, two from each group. The augmentation procedure failed in two patients and only 6.3 mm-long implants could be inserted. There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis and implant failures. Three prostheses could not be placed or had to be remade in the short implant group versus 4 prostheses in the augmented group. Two short implants failed versus 3 long implants, all in different patients. There were statistically significantly more complications in augmented patients (22 complications in 20 augmented patients versus 5 complications in 5 patients of the short implant group). Both groups gradually lost peri-implant bone in astatistically significant way at 4 months, and 1 and 3 years after loading. Three years after loading,patients of the short implant group lost an average of 1.24 mm of peri-implant bone compared with 1.76 mm in the long implant group. Short implants experienced statistically significantly less bone loss (0.52 mm; CI 95% 0.20 to 0.83, P = 0.002) than long implants.Conclusions: When residual bone height over the mandibular canal is between 7 and 8 mm, 6.3 mm short implants could be an interesting alternative to vertical augmentation since the treatment is faster,cheaper and associated with less morbidity. Longer follow-ups are needed to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether short (5 to 8.5 mm) dental implants could be a suitable alternative to longer (>11.5 mm) implants placed in atrophic maxillae augmented with autogenous bone for supporting dental prostheses. Materials and methods: Twenty-eight patients with fully edentulous atrophic maxillae having 5 to 9 mm of residual crestal bone height at least 5 mm thick, as measured on computerised tomography scans, were randomised into two groups either to receive 4 to 8 short (5 to 8.5 mm) implants (15 patients) or autogenous bone from the iliac crest to allow the placement of at least 11.5 mm long implants (13 patients). Bone blocks and the windows at maxillary sinuses were covered with rigid resorbable barriers. Grafts were left to heal for 4 months before placing implants, which were submerged. After 4 months, provisional reinforced acrylic prostheses or bar-retained overdentures were delivered. Provisional prostheses were replaced, after 4 months, by definitive screw-retained metal-resin cross-arch fixed dental prostheses. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complications (including prolonged postoperative pain) and patient satisfaction. All patients were followed for 5 months after loading. Results: All patients could be rehabilitated with implant-supported prostheses and none dropped out. One bilateral sinus lift procedure failed due to infection, though short implants could be placed. One implant failed in the augmented group versus 2 short implants in 2 patients. All failures occurred before loading. Significantly more complications occurred in augmented patients: 8 complications occurred in 5 augmented patients (all complained of pain 1 month after bone harvesting from the iliac crest). No complications occurred in the short implant group. All patients were fully satisfied with the treatment and would do it again. Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that short implants may be a suitable, cheaper and faster alternative to longer implants placed in bone augmented with autogenous bone for rehabilitating edentulous atrophic maxillae. However, these preliminary results need to be confirmed by larger trials with follow-ups of at least 5 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether 5 mm short dental implants could be an alternative to augmentation with anorganic bovine bone and placement of at least 10 mm long implants in posterior atrophic jaws. Materials and methods: Fifteen patients with bilateral atrophic mandibles (5-7 mm bone height above the mandibular canal), and 15 patients with bilateral atrophic maxillae (4-6 mm bone height below the maxillary sinus) and bone thickness of at least 8 mm, were randomised according to a split-mouth design to receive one to three 5 mm short implants or at least 10 mm long implants in augmented bone. Mandibles were vertically augmented with interpositional bone blocks and maxillary sinuses with particulated bone via a lateral window. Implants were placed after 4 months, submerged and loaded, after 4 months, with provisional prostheses. Four months later, definitive provisionally cemented prostheses were delivered. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complication and peri-implant marginal bone level changes. Results: In 5 augmented mandibles, the planned 10 mm long implants could not be placed and shorter implants (7 and 8.5 mm) had to be used instead. One year after loading no patient dropped out. Two long (8.5 mm in the mandible and 13 mm in the maxilla) implants and one 5 mm short maxillary implant failed. There were no statistically significant differences in failures or complications. Patients with short implants lost on average 1 mm of peri-implant bone and patients with longer implants lost 1.2 mm. This difference was statistically significant. Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that 1 year after loading, 5 mm short implants achieve similar if not better results than longer implants placed in augmented bone. Short implants might be a preferable choice to bone augmentation since the treatment is faster, cheaper and associated with less morbidity, however their long-term prognosis is unknown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflict-of-interest statement: This was an investigator initiated trial, however the trial was partially supported by Zimmer Dental, Vittorio Veneto (TV), Italy. One of the authors (Dr Cosci) who treated eight patients in this study is the inventor of the Cosci technique and was a prerequisite of the sponsor to support the trial. Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of two different techniques to lift the maxillary sinus via a crestal approach: the Summers versus the Cosci technique. Materials and methods: Fifteen partially edentulous patients missing bilaterally maxillary molars and/ or premolars having 4 to 7 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5 mm thickness below the maxillary sinuses measured on computed tomography scans were randomised to have implants placed in sinuses crestally lifted according to the Cosci or Summers technique with bone substitutes according to a split-mouth design. Implants were left to heal submerged for 6 months. Implants were loaded with acrylic provisional crowns/prostheses. Screw-retained definitive metal-ceramic prostheses were delivered 4 months after provisional loading. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, operation time, operator preference, and patient preference assessed 1 month after surgery and 1 month after delivery of the final prostheses by a blinded outcome assessor. All patients were followed up to 5 months after loading (1 year after implant placement). Results: Nineteen study implants were placed according to each technique. No patient dropped out and no implant failed. No discomfort/complications occurred at sites treated with the Cosci technique whereas 12 patients reported discomfort during the augmentation procedure at the side treated with the Summers technique, this was statistically significant, and in one of these patients a perforation of the sinus membrane occurred. Postoperatively, headache was reported by nine patients and swelling occurred in three of these patients at the Summers treated sides. Statistically significantly less time was required to place implants according to the Cosci technique (33 versus 24 minutes, on average). The two operators and 14 out of 15 patients preferred the Cosci technique. Conclusions: Both crestal sinus lift techniques were successful but the Cosci technique required less surgical time, produced less intra- and postoperative morbidity and was preferred by patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of two different techniques to augment maxillary sinuses using a lateral window approach: rigid synthetic resorbable barriers (Inion) versus granular anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss). Materials and methods: Ten partially edentulous patients having bilaterally 1 to 5 mm of residual bone height and at least 5 mm bone width below the maxillary sinuses, as measured on computed tomography (CT) scans, were randomised to receive two different 2-stage sinus lift procedures using the lateral window approach. In one side, the sinus lining was raised by placing a resorbable rigid Inion barrier without any bone substitute whereas the contralateral side was loosely packed with 100% granular Bio-Oss. After 6 months, 2 to 3 implants were inserted at each side and submerged for 4 months. Implants were loaded with provisional acrylic prostheses and replaced after 4 months, by definitive screwretained metal-ceramic prostheses. Outcome measures were: time necessary to complete the augmentation procedure, bone gain on CT scans, histomorphometry, any complication, implant and prosthetic failures, and clinician and patient preference assessed by a blinded outcome assessor. All patients were followed up to 5 months after loading. Results: No patient dropped out. There was no significant difference in time to complete the augmentation procedure (19.8 minutes for Inion versus 20.5 for Bio-Oss). After 6 months, both interventions gained bone in a highly statistically significant way (14.4 mm for Inion versus 14.1 mm for Bio-Oss) with no significant differences between the procedures. Histologically, more new bone formed at Bio-Oss treated sites (36.1% versus 24.2%), the difference being highly statistically significant (P = 0.002). There were no differences in complications between groups (2 perforations of the maxillary lining at Inion treated sites versus 1 at a Bio-Oss site), however, in one of the patients where a perforation occurred at the Inion site, at implant placement, the sinus was two-thirds filled with soft tissue and the site was successfully retreated with Bio-Oss. No implant failed. The clinician preferred Bio-Oss because it was simpler to handle. There were no statistically significant differences in patient preference 1 month after surgery and 1 month after delivery of definitive prostheses: 8 patients had no preference while 2 preferred the Bio-Oss treated side. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether short (5 mm) dental implants could be a suitable alternative to augmentation and placement of longer implants (10 mm) in posterior atrophic jaws. Materials and methods: Thirty partially edentulous patients with bilateral posterior edentulism were included: 15 patients having 5 to 7 mm of residual crestal height above the mandibular canal, and 15 patients having 4 to 6 mm of residual crestal height below the maxillary sinus and bone thickness of at least 8 mm measured on a CT scan. The patients were randomised either to receive one to three submerged 5-mm-long Rescue implants (Megagen) or 10-mm-long implants placed in augmented bone according to a split-mouth design. Mandibles were augmented with interpositional anorganic bovine bone blocks (Bio-Oss) and maxillae with granular Bio-Oss placed through a lateral window under the lifted sinus membrane. Resorbable barriers were used to cover the grafted sites. Grafts were left to heal for 4 months before placing the implants using a submerged technique. Four months after implant placement, provisional reinforced acrylic prostheses were delivered and replaced 4 months later by definitive screw-retained metal-ceramic prostheses. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, time needed to fully recover mental nerve function (only for mandibular implants) and patient preference assessed 1 month after loading. All patients were followed up to delivery of the final restorations (4 months after loading). Results: A systematic deviation from the research protocol occurred: the operator used another implant system (EZ Plus, Megagen) for implants 10 mm or longer with a diameter of 4 mm at the augmented sites. No patients dropped out. In 5 patients of the augmented group (all mandibles), there was not enough height to place 10-mm-long implants as planned and shorter implants (7 and 8.5 mm) were used instead. In each group, one prosthesis could not be placed when planned because an implant was found to be mobile at abutment connection: one 5 mm maxillary implant and one 8.5 mm mandibular implant in the augmented group. Five complications occurred: two in the augmented group (one maxillary sinus perforation and one mandibular wound dehiscence after implant placement possibly associated with the failure of one implant) versus three maxillary sinus perforations in the 5-mm-long implant group. The difference was not statistically significant. No patient suffered from permanent disruption of alveolar inferior nerve function, however, significantly more patients had paraesthesia for up to 3 days in the augmented group. There was no statistically significant difference in patient preference with the majority of patients expressing no preference for which treatment they received, finding both of them acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether 7-mm-long implants could be a suitable alternative to longer implants placed in vertically augmented bone for the treatment of atrophic posterior mandibles. Materials and methods: Sixty partially edentulous patients having 7 to 8 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5.5 mm thickness measured on a computed tomography scan above the mandibular canal were randomised to receive either two to three submerged 7-mm-long NanoTite External Hex implants (Biomet 3i) or 10-mm or longer implants (30 patients per group) placed in vertically augmented bone. Bone was augmented with anorganic bovine bone blocks (Bio-Oss) using a sandwich technique and resorbable barriers. The grafts were left healing for 5 months before placing the implants, which were submerged. Four months after implant placement, provisional acrylic prostheses were delivered. Definitive screw-retained metal-ceramic prostheses were delivered 4 months later. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, and time needed to fully recover mental nerve sensitivity. All patients were followed up to the delivery of the final restorations (4 months after loading). Results: No patient dropped out. In two patients of the augmented group, there was not enough space to place 10-mm or longer implants as planned and 7-mm-long implants were used instead. The most likely reason for this is that the Bio-Oss blocks fractured in many pieces at placement. One prosthesis could not be placed when planned in the 7-mm group versus three prostheses in the augmented group, because of failure of one implant in each patient. The difference was not statistically significant. All implants were successfully replaced and final prostheses delivered. Four complications (wound dehiscence) occurred during graft healing in the augmented group (one possibly associated with the failure of one implant) versus none in the 7-mm-long implant group. The difference was not statistically significant. No patient suffered from permanent paraesthesia of the alveolar inferior nerve; however, sensitivity was recovered significantly faster in the short implant group. Conclusions: The early results of this study suggest that, when the residual bone height over the mandibular canal is between 7 and 8 mm, 7-mm short implants might be a preferable choice since the treatment is faster, cheaper and associated with less morbidity than vertical bone augmentation. These preliminary results must be confirmed by follow-ups of 5 years or more in order to monitor the performance of short implants over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the efficacy, complications and patient preference of two different techniques for vertical bone augmentation of the posterior mandible: bone blocks harvested from the iliac crest versus anorganic bovine bone blocks (Bio-Oss®) were used as inlays. Materials and methods: Ten partially edentulous patients, requiring bilateral and vertical bone augmentation of the posterior mandible (having 5 to 7 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5 mm thickness above the mandibular canal to allow for implant placement) had their posterior mandibles randomly allocated to both interventions. Resorbable barriers were used to cover the grafts. After 4 months, implants were inserted, and after a further 4 months, provisional prostheses were inserted. Definitive prostheses were delivered 4 months later. Prosthesis and implant failures, the amount of vertically regenerated bone measured on computerised tomography (CT) scans, any complications, the time needed to fully recover mental nerve sensitivity and patient preference were all recorded. All patients were followed up for up to 1 month after the delivery of the final restorations. Results: Up to 5 months post-loading no patients dropped out or were excluded. Both procedures obtained significant bone gain and achieved the desired results. Four months after grafting, autogenous bone loss was on average 1.1 mm (P=0.088) and Bio-Oss 0.6 mm (P=0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in bone gain and maintenance among the two procedures. The sides treated with Bio-Oss recovered their full mental nerve sensitivity significantly faster than those treated with autogenous bone (4 versus 6.3 days). Three complications occurred during graft healing; two in the autogenous bone group and one determining the complete failure of the augmentation procedure. No implants or prosthesis could be placed in the planed area. There was no statistically significant differences in the occurrence of complications between the procedures. After implant placement one complication occurred in the autogenous bone group (probably as a consequence of a previous complication). Patients significantly preferred the treatment with Bio-Oss: 3 weeks after augmentation seven patients preferred Bio-Oss and three patients found the treatments to be 'equally good' (odds ratio 0.045 [5% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.87], P=0.04). One month after delivery of the final prostheses, eight patients preferred Bio-Oss and two patients found the treatments to be 'equally good' (odds ratio 0.03 [95% CI 0.00 to 0.64], P=0.02). Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that it might be sensible to use Bio-Oss blocks rather than bone harvested from the iliac crest as the interpositional graft in the treatment of resorbed posterior mandible, as patient discomfort is reduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate whether short (5 to 8.5 mm) dental implants could be a suitable alternative to longer (>11.5 mm) implants placed in atrophic maxillae augmented with autogenous bone for supporting dental prostheses., Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with fully edentulous atrophic maxillae having 5 to 9 mm of residual crestal bone height at least 5 mm thick, as measured on computerised tomography scans, were randomised into two groups either to receive 4 to 8 short (5 to 8.5 mm) implants (15 patients) or autogenous bone from the iliac crest to allow the placement of at least 11.5 mmlong implants (13 patients). Bone blocks and the windows at maxillary sinuses were covered with rigid resorbable barriers. Grafts were left to heal for 4 months before placing implants, which were submerged. After 4 months, provisional reinforced acrylic prostheses or bar-retained overdentures were delivered. Provisional prostheses were replaced, after 4 months, by definitive screw-retained metal-resin cross-arch fixed dental prostheses. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complications (including prolonged postoperative pain) and patient satisfaction. All patients were followed for 5 months after loading., Results: All patients could be rehabilitated with implant-supported prostheses and none dropped out. One bilateral sinus lift procedure failed due to infection, though short implants could be placed. One implant failed in the augmented group versus 2 short implants in 2 patients. All failures occurred before loading. Significantly more complications occurred in augmented patients: 8 complications occurred in 5 augmented patients (all complained of pain 1 month after bone harvesting from the iliac crest). No complications occurred in the short implant group. All patients were fully satisfied with the treatment and would do it again., Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that short implants may be a suitable, cheaper and faster alternative to longer implants placed in bone augmented with autogenous bone for rehabilitating edentulous atrophic maxillae. However, these preliminary results need to be confirmed by larger trials with follow-ups of at least 5 years.