Search

Purpose: To evaluate the number of patients with dental implants who present to a dental school clinic for screening and to report the prevalence of peri-implant bone level change detected on digital panoramic radiographs of those subjects., Materials and Methods: Patient screening files for 9,422 patients over a 2-year period were examined to see how many patients presented with dental implants. Those patients with at least one implant were further evaluated by measuring the bone level on the mesial and distal sides of the implant using the screening radiograph., Results: A total of 187 patients (2%) had at least one implant. In regard to implants, 423 were examined and 146 (33%) had no detectable bone loss defined as bone level below the top of the implant. When thresholds of bone loss were evaluated, 109 implants (25%) had ≥ 2 mm of bone loss on either the mesial or distal sides or both. The median bone loss was 1.74 mm for the 277 implants with detectable bone loss and 2.97 mm for the 109 implants that had ≥ 2 mm bone loss. Interestingly, patients who were ≥ 70 years of age had significantly (P = .03) more bone loss in the mandible compared with the maxilla, while patients who were 60 to 69 years of age had significantly greater loss in the maxilla., Conclusion: These data reveal that for patients presenting to the dental school for a screening over a 2-year period, 1.98% had one or more dental implants. Furthermore, those patients with implants had a minimum amount of bone loss as measured from the top of the implant.

Objectives: To investigate the prevalence and morphological parameters of lingual concavity, and whether these factors are related to a higher risk of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injury when performing an immediate implant surgery in posterior mandible region., Methods: The CBCT images from 237 subjects (1008 teeth) were analysed the shape of the mandibles (C, P, U type), dimensional parameters of lingual concavity (angle, height, depth), and its relation to inferior alveolar canal (IAC) (A, B, C zone), RAC (distance from root apex to IAC) and probability of IAN injury. Multiple logistic regression modelling to determine the odds ratio of variables that made an important contribution to the probability of IAN injury and to adjust for confounding variables., Results: The U type ridge (46.7%) and the most concave point located at C zone (48.8%) are most prevalent in this region. The mandibular second molar presents highest risk for IAN injury than other tooth type (p<0.001), which were 3.82 times to occur IAN injury than the mandibular second premolar. The concave point located at A zone and B zone were 7.82 and 3.52 times than C zone to have IAN damage, respectively. The probability of IAN injury will reduce 26% for every 1mm increase in RAC (p<0.001)., Conclusions: The tooth type, morphological features of lingual concavities, and RAC are associated with risks of IAN injury during immediate implant placement., Clinical Significance: Pre-surgical mapping of the IAC and identification of its proximity relative to the lingual concavity in the posterior mandible regions may avoid unpleasant complications, specifically when performing immediate implant procedures., (Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)