Retrospective Evaluation of Implants Placed in Iliac Crest Autografts and Pristine Bone.
Options
BORIS DOI
Publisher DOI
PubMed ID
35268457
Description
OBJECTIVE
Iliac crest autografts can compensate for severe mandibular atrophy before implant placement. However, the implant success in the augmented bone is not entirely predictable. Here we performed a retrospective cohort study to determine the success and related parameters of implants placed in augmented bone and pristine bone for up to 11 years.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We analyzed 18 patients where 72 implants were placed six months after iliac crest transplantation and 19 patients where 76 implants were placed in pristine bone. The primary endpoint was implant loss. Secondary endpoints were the implant success, peri-implant bone loss, and the clinical parameters related to peri-implantitis. Moreover, we evaluated the oral-health-related quality of life (OHIP).
RESULTS
Within a mean follow-up of 5.8 ± 2.2 and 7.6 ± 2.8 years, six but no implants were lost when placed in augmented and pristine bone, respectively. Among those implants remaining in situ, 58% and 68% were rated as implant success (p = 0.09). A total of 11% and 16% of the implants placed in the augmented and the pristine bone were identified as peri-implantitis (p = 0.08). Bone loss was similar in both groups, with a mean of 2.95 ± 1.72 mm and 2.44 ± 0.76 mm. The mean OHIP scores were 16.36 ± 13.76 and 8.78 ± 7.21 in the augmentation and the control group, respectively (p = 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS
Implants placed in iliac crest autografts have a higher risk for implant loss and lower implant success rates compared to those placed in the pristine bone.
Iliac crest autografts can compensate for severe mandibular atrophy before implant placement. However, the implant success in the augmented bone is not entirely predictable. Here we performed a retrospective cohort study to determine the success and related parameters of implants placed in augmented bone and pristine bone for up to 11 years.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We analyzed 18 patients where 72 implants were placed six months after iliac crest transplantation and 19 patients where 76 implants were placed in pristine bone. The primary endpoint was implant loss. Secondary endpoints were the implant success, peri-implant bone loss, and the clinical parameters related to peri-implantitis. Moreover, we evaluated the oral-health-related quality of life (OHIP).
RESULTS
Within a mean follow-up of 5.8 ± 2.2 and 7.6 ± 2.8 years, six but no implants were lost when placed in augmented and pristine bone, respectively. Among those implants remaining in situ, 58% and 68% were rated as implant success (p = 0.09). A total of 11% and 16% of the implants placed in the augmented and the pristine bone were identified as peri-implantitis (p = 0.08). Bone loss was similar in both groups, with a mean of 2.95 ± 1.72 mm and 2.44 ± 0.76 mm. The mean OHIP scores were 16.36 ± 13.76 and 8.78 ± 7.21 in the augmentation and the control group, respectively (p = 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS
Implants placed in iliac crest autografts have a higher risk for implant loss and lower implant success rates compared to those placed in the pristine bone.
Date of Publication
2022-03-02
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
Keyword(s)
atrophy autologous transplants dental implants iliac crest bone implant-supported denture mandible
Language(s)
en
Contributor(s)
Beck, Florian | |
Watzak, Georg | |
Lettner, Stefan | |
Gahleitner, André | |
Dvorak, Gabriella | |
Ulm, Christian |
Additional Credits
Series
Journal of clinical medicine
Publisher
MDPI
ISSN
2077-0383
Access(Rights)
open.access