SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Cumhuriyet Dental Journal / 2013 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

Retrospectıve evaluatıon of dental ımplant success. three to five years follow up

3 ile 5 yıl arasında takibi yapılan dental implant baş arısının geriye dönük olarak değ erlendirilmesi

Emrah SOYLU
Zeynep Burçin GÖNEN
Erdem KILIÇ
Nükhet ÇELEBİ
Osman ETÖZ
Alper ALKAN
Pages
20–24
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions: According to the results of this study, dental implant treatment has a high success rate.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Dental implant treatment is a common procedure for the rehabilitation of partially or fully edentulous patients.The aim of this study is to evaluate dental implant success retrospectively.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: 549 dental implants in 168 patients, who were treated between the years 2006 and 2008, were included in this study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: According to the results of this study, dental implant treatment has a high success rate.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: Dental implant treatment is a common procedure for the rehabilitation of partially or fully edentulous patients.The aim of this study is to evaluate dental implant success retrospectively. Materials and Methods: 549 dental implants in 168 patients, who were treated between the years 2006 and 2008, were included in this study. The success rate of implant therapy was evaluated considering the site of implant placement, primary stability (PS), bone quality (BQ), one-stage (OS) or two-stage (TS) surgery, and the number of lost implants. Results: 549 dental implants were applied to 168 (72 Male: 96 Female)patients. The mean age was 44. 16,5% of 549 dental implants (n:91) were applied to mandible anterior(MA), 34% (n:187)were applied to mandible posterior(MP), 18,5%(n:102) were applied to maxilla anterior (MaxA) and 30,7% (n:169) were applied to maxilla posterior(MaxP). There were only three lost implants. Two of the lost implants were applied to MP and the other one was applied to MaxP. Conclusions: According to the results of this study, dental implant treatment has a high success rate.

Özet

Amaç: Dental implant uygulamaları tam ve kısmi diş eksikliklerinin tedavisinde sıklıkla uygulanan bir tedavi seçeneğ idir. Bu çalış manın amacı 2006-2008 yılları arasında kliniğ imizde uygulanan kemik içi implant uygulamasının baş arının geriye dönük olarak değ erlendirilmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntem: 2006-2008 yılları arasında Erciyes Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliğ i Fakültesi Ağ ız Diş ve Çene Cerrahisi Anabilim Dalına baş vuran 168 hastaya 549 adet kemik içi dental implant (Straumann, Bazel, İ sviçre) uygulaması yapıldı ve sonuçlar implant uygulanan bölge, primer stabilite (PS), kemik kalitesi (KK), cerrahinin tek aş ama (TAC) ve çift aş ama(ÇAC) olması ve kayıp implantlar açısından ayrı ayrı değ erlendirildi. Bulgular: Yaş ortalaması 44 olan 168 hastaya (72 Erkek: 96 Bayan ) 549 adet kemik içi dental implant uygulanmış tır. 549 dental implantın %16,5i (n:91) alt çene anteriora (AÇA), %34ü (n:187) alt çene posteriora (AÇP), %18,5i (n:102) üst çene anteriora (ÜÇA) ve %30,7si (n:169) de üst çene posteriora (ÜÇP) yerleş tirilmiş tir. Yerleş tirilen 549 implantın 3 tanesinde kayıp yaş anmış tır. Kayıp implantların iki tanesi AÇP ye, bir tanesi ÜÇP ye yerleş tirilmiş tir. Sonuç: Bu çalış manın sonuçlarına göre dental implant tedavisi, baş arı oranı yüksek bir tedavi seçeneğ idir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SOYLU, E., GÖNEN, Z. B., KILIÇ, E., ÇELEBİ, N., ETÖZ, O., ALKAN, A. (2022). Retrospectıve evaluatıon of dental ımplant success. three to five years follow up. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 20–24. https://ajindex.com/articles/477183

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Mueller CK, Thorwarth M, Schmidt M, Schlegel KA, Schultze-Mosgau S. Comparative analysis of osseointegration of titanium implants with acid-etched surfaces and different biomolecular coatings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112(6):726-736
  2. Buser D, Merıcske-Stern R, Dula K, Lang NP. Clınıcal Experıence Wıth One-Stage, Non-Submerged Dental Implants. Adv Dent Res 1999;(13):153-161
  3. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10(6):387-416
  4. Simonis P, Dufour T, Tenenbaum H. Long-term implant survival and success: a 10-16-year follow-up of non-submerged dental implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010;(21):772-777
  5. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B: A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002;29 (Suppl. 3):197- 212
  6. Block MS, Achong RM. Ossoeintegration. In: Miloro M. Peterson's Prıncıples Of Oral And Maxıllofacıal Surgery.Vol:1. 2nd ed. London; BC Decker Inc; 2004. p.189-203
  7. Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Chew YS, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: 1- versus 2-stage implant placement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;8(3):CD006698
  8. Ş imş ek B. [Osseointegration]. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci Special Edition 2010;1(1):1-7.