We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
International Poster Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 12 (2010), No. 2     15. June 2010

Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 2010, Vol 12 No 2, Poster 485

Retrospective 10-year follow-up examination of the TiOblast®-implant in the edentulous, not-augmented mandible

Language: English
 

Authors:
Dr. Peer W. Kämmerer, Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. Bilal Al-Nawas, Dr. Dr. Marcus O. Klein, Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. Wilfried Wagner,
University Medical Center Mainz, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Dr. Joachim Wegener,
University Medical Center Mainz, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry

Date/Event/Venue:
10.10.2009 - 11.10.2009
6. Astra Tech Symposium Germany
Frankfurt am Main, Germany
 

Introduction

For dental implant systems, clinical long-term follow-up examinations with high patient numbers are necessarily needed but rarely available (1, 2). Therefore, the following study evaluated the cumulative survival rate (CSR) of the TiOblast®-implant (Astratech, Sweden, figure 1a) in the edentulous mandible without prior bony augmentation 10 years after prosthetic maintenance (figure 1b).

Fig. 1a: TiOblast®-implant
 
Fig. 1b: 4 TiOblast®- implants in the edentulous mandible
 

Material and Methods

216 TiOblast®-implants were inserted in 45 patients (mean age: 64 years (41-86)) between September 1994 and May 2005.

Indication: edentulous mandible;
no prior bony augmentation.
- 3 patients (15 implants; 7%) were implanted after radiation therapy, 10 patients (45 implants; 21%) were irradiated after operation.

Follow-up examination:
- CSR
- Assessment according to different success criteria (Albrektsson (3) and Buser (4))
- Investigation of vertical bone loss.
 

Results

CSR:
- Total implants (TI; n=216): after 85 months (standard deviation (STD): 34 months) 203 implants (94%) in situ (figure 2).
- Irradiated implants (II; n=60): after 85 months (STD: 31 months) 58 implants (97%) in situ.
-- Reasons for implant loss:
-- No bony healing (n=8)
-- periimplantitis (n=5).

Clinical Assessment of success:
- A clinical control-examination was conducted in 40 patients with 196 implants.
- 5 patients with 20 Implantaten were not available.
- The analysis according to the chosen success criteria showed cummulative values of - 86% (Albrektsson) and - 91% (Buser).
- The vertical bone loss added up to a mean value of 2.2mm (figure 3).

Fig. 2: Implant-related Kaplan-Meier-analysis of the implants in the centre of this study (n=216)
 
Fig. 3: Vertical bone loss after 10 years of prosthetic maintenance (n=89; min.:-1.23mm; max.:7.83mm; STD: 1.94mm)
 

Conclusions

Especially in regard to the "critical" patients (28% of the implants in the irradiated mandible), the implant system showed, with an in situ rate of 94% after 10 years of clinical use, satisfying results.
A mean bone loss of 2.2mm after 10 years semms to be acceptable; similar long-time studies 1 ,5 could examine a mean bone loss of 0.2mm per year.
 

Literature

  1. Rasmusson L, Roos J, Bystedt H.: A 10-year follow-up study of titanium dioxide-blasted implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7(1):36-42.
  2. Schulda C, Steveling H. [Ten-years-results with the ASTRA TECH implant system]. Implantologie 2006; 14: 81-92.
  3. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986 Summer;1(1):11-25.
  4. Buser D, Brägger U, Lang NP, Nyman S. Regeneration and enlargement of jaw bone using guided tissue regeneration. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1990 Dec;1(1):22-32.
  5. Schwartz-Arad D, Kidron N, Dolev E.: A long-term study of implants supporting overdentures as a model for implant success. J Periodontol. 2005 Sep;76(9):1431-5.
     

This Poster was submitted by Dr. Peer W. Kämmerer.
 

Correspondence address:
Dr. Peer W. Kämmerer
University Medical Center Mainz
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Augustusplatz 2
55131 Mainz, Germany