Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study is to assess whether axial and tilted implants supporting All-on-4 prosthesis show any differences in terms of survival rate, success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) after a long-term follow-up (mean 9 years). Material and Methods: One hundred and fifty-six implants were included in this study, 78 of which were tilted (Group A) and 78 were axial (Group B). MBL was measured after a mean time of 9 years on periapical radiographs. Success and survival rate were assessed with the Misch criteria. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was calculated. Statistical analysis was conducted to assess comparisons between groups. A Kaplan–Meyer analysis was carried out for the survival rate. Results: A total of 156 implants were analyzed. After a 9-year mean time follow-up, the survival rate was 96.2% in group A and 98.7% in group B; and the success rate was 80.8% in group A and 74.4% in group B. The mean MBL was 1.2 mm (IQR 0.6–1.8) in group A and 1.4 mm (IQR 0.9–2.1) in group B. No statistically significant differences were shown between the two groups (p < 0.05). Peri-implantitis occurred in 15 implants and was equally distributed between the two groups. Conclusions: This study shows that axial and tilted implants have similar success rates, survival rates and MBL values after a long-time follow-up, assessing the biological reliability of the prosthesis they supported. Peri-implantitis occurred equally between the two groups.

A retrospective analysis on marginal bone loss around tilted and axial implants in immediate-loaded all-on-4 with a long-term follow-up evaluation / F. Tironi, F. Orlando, F. Azzola, S. Corbella, L.A. Francetti. - In: PROSTHESIS. - ISSN 2673-1592. - 4:1(2022 Jan 24), pp. 15-23. [10.3390/prosthesis4010002]

A retrospective analysis on marginal bone loss around tilted and axial implants in immediate-loaded all-on-4 with a long-term follow-up evaluation

F. Tironi
Primo
;
F. Azzola;S. Corbella
Penultimo
;
L.A. Francetti
Ultimo
2022

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study is to assess whether axial and tilted implants supporting All-on-4 prosthesis show any differences in terms of survival rate, success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) after a long-term follow-up (mean 9 years). Material and Methods: One hundred and fifty-six implants were included in this study, 78 of which were tilted (Group A) and 78 were axial (Group B). MBL was measured after a mean time of 9 years on periapical radiographs. Success and survival rate were assessed with the Misch criteria. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was calculated. Statistical analysis was conducted to assess comparisons between groups. A Kaplan–Meyer analysis was carried out for the survival rate. Results: A total of 156 implants were analyzed. After a 9-year mean time follow-up, the survival rate was 96.2% in group A and 98.7% in group B; and the success rate was 80.8% in group A and 74.4% in group B. The mean MBL was 1.2 mm (IQR 0.6–1.8) in group A and 1.4 mm (IQR 0.9–2.1) in group B. No statistically significant differences were shown between the two groups (p < 0.05). Peri-implantitis occurred in 15 implants and was equally distributed between the two groups. Conclusions: This study shows that axial and tilted implants have similar success rates, survival rates and MBL values after a long-time follow-up, assessing the biological reliability of the prosthesis they supported. Peri-implantitis occurred equally between the two groups.
implant dentistry; immediate load; All-on-4
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
24-gen-2022
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
prosthesis-04-00002.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 5.49 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
5.49 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/902906
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact