Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of Submerged and Nonsubmerged Bone‐Level Implants with Internal Hexagonal Connections in Immediate Implantation: A 5‐Year Retrospective Study

PURPOSE To evaluate the 5-year clinical and radiologic outcome of immediate implantation using submerged and nonsubmerged techniques with bone-level implants and internal hexagonal connections and the effects of potential influencing factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 114 bone-level implants (XiVE S plus) with internal hexagonal connections inserted into 72 patients were included. Patients were followed up for 5 years. A t-test was used to statistically evaluate the marginal bone loss between the submerged and nonsubmerged groups. The cumulative survival rate (CSR) was calculated according to the life table method and illustrated with Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Comparisons of the CSR between healing protocols, guided bone regeneration, implants with different sites, lengths, and diameters were performed using log-rank tests. RESULTS The 5-year cumulative implant survival rates with submerged and nonsubmerged healing were 94% and 96%, respectively. No statistically significant differences in terms of marginal bone loss, healing protocol, application of guided bone regeneration, implant site, or length were observed. CONCLUSIONS High CSRs and good marginal bone levels were achieved 5 years after immediate implantation of bone-level implants with internal hexagonal connections using both the submerged and nonsubmerged techniques. Factors such as implant length, site, and application of guided bone regeneration did not have an impact on the long-term success of the implants.

[1]  P. Galindo-Moreno,et al.  Immediate Implants Placed in Fresh Sockets Associated with Periapical Pathology: A Split-Mouth Design and Survival Evaluation after 1-Year Follow-Up. , 2016, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[2]  Fuqiang Zhang,et al.  Immediate dental implant placement into infected vs. non-infected sockets: a meta-analysis. , 2016, Clinical oral implants research.

[3]  A. Piattelli,et al.  10-year prospective cohort follow-up of immediately restored XiVE implants. , 2016, Clinical oral implants research.

[4]  L. Sbordone,et al.  Marginal masticatory mucosa dimensional changes in immediate post-extractive implants: a 2 year prospective cohort study. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  H. Larjava,et al.  Retrospective cohort study of 4591 Straumann implants in private practice setting, with up to 10-year follow-up. Part 1: multivariate survival analysis. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[6]  I. Grunert,et al.  A 7-year prospective radiographic evaluation of marginal bone level around two different implant systems: a randomized clinical trial. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[7]  M. Cicciu',et al.  A Four-Year Survival Rate Multicenter Prospective Clinical Study on 377 Implants: Correlations Between Implant Insertion Torque, Diameter, and Bone Quality. , 2015, The Journal of oral implantology.

[8]  H. Davies,et al.  Healing of Bio-Oss® grafted marginal gaps at implants placed into fresh extraction sockets of incisor teeth in dogs: a study on the effect of submerged vs. non-submerged healing. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[9]  Marcus Abboud,et al.  Narrow- versus mini-implants at crestal and subcrestal bone levels. Experimental study in beagle dogs at three months , 2014, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[10]  H. Yılmaz,et al.  Clinical evaluation of submerged and non-submerged implants for posterior single-tooth replacements: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial. , 2014, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[11]  A. Pozzi,et al.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of two implants with different prosthetic interfaces and neck configurations: randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial. , 2014, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[12]  M. Bravo,et al.  Dental implant stability is influenced by implant diameter and localization and by the use of plasma rich in growth factors. , 2012, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[13]  A. Piattelli,et al.  Primary stability determination by means of insertion torque and RFA in a sample of 4,135 implants. , 2012, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[14]  N. Lang,et al.  Alveolar process preservation at implants installed immediately into extraction sockets using deproteinized bovine bone mineral - an experimental study in dogs. , 2012, Clinical oral implants research.

[15]  K. Gotfredsen.  A 10-year prospective study of single tooth implants placed in the anterior maxilla. , 2012, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[16]  M. Wong,et al.  A systematic review on survival and success rates of implants placed immediately into fresh extraction sockets after at least 1 year. , 2012, Clinical oral implants research.

[17]  L. Cordaro,et al.  Clinical outcome of submerged vs. non-submerged implants placed in fresh extraction sockets. , 2009, Clinical oral implants research.

[18]  M. Lorenzoni,et al.  Immediate provisional restoration of XiVE screw-type implants in the posterior mandible. , 2008, Clinical oral implants research.

[19]  S. Isaksson,et al.  A prospective multicenter study using two different surgical approaches in the mandible with turned Brånemark implants: conventional loading using fixed prostheses. , 2007, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[20]  Ian Shrier,et al.  Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles. , 2007, American journal of epidemiology.

[21]  L. McManus,et al.  Peri-implant Inflammation Defined by the Implant-Abutment Interface , 2006, Journal of dental research.

[22]  Marco Degidi,et al.  Comparative analysis study of 702 dental implants subjected to immediate functional loading and immediate nonfunctional loading to traditional healing periods with a follow-up of up to 24 months. , 2005, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[23]  D Buser,et al.  Persistent Acute Inflammation at the Implant-Abutment Interface , 2003, Journal of dental research.

[24]  Jean-Pierre Bernard,et al.  The use of reduced healing times on ITI implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: early results from clinical trials on ITI SLA implants. , 2002, Clinical oral implants research.

[25]  G. Gómez-Román.  Influence of flap design on peri-implant interproximal crestal bone loss around single-tooth implants. , 2001, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[26]  D. Buser,et al.  Basic surgical principles with ITI implants. , 2000, Clinical oral implants research.

[27]  N. Lang,et al.  Clinical Experience with One-Stage, Non-Submerged Dental Implants , 1999, Advances in dental research.

[28]  G Zarb,et al.  The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. , 1986, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.