...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants >A comparison of characteristics of implant failure and survival in periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients: a clinical report.
【24h】

A comparison of characteristics of implant failure and survival in periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients: a clinical report.

机译：牙周受损和牙周健康患者的植入物衰竭和生存特征比较：临床报告。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PURPOSE: This study compares implant survival and patterns of implant failure in periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a private periodontal practice, over a 13-year period, implants were placed in both periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients. Implants were classified in 5 different groups according to surface texture. Survival rates in each group were compared according to implant location, diameter, length, and phase of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 1,511 implants were placed in 334 patients. One hundred fifty-one of these patients, classified as periodontally compromised patients (PCP), received 923 implants. The remaining 183 patients, classified as periodontally healthy patients (PHP), received 588 implants. The overall survival rate for implants placed in the PHP group was 93.7%, compared to 90.6% in the PCP group. The survival rate of hydroxyapatite-coated implants was 92.6% in the PHP group and 81% in the PCP group. The survival rate of the turned-surface implants was similar in both groups. DISCUSSION: Two types of implant failure were identified. The first was failure of the implant to osseointegrate. This type of failure occurred early in treatment and appeared to be related to smooth-surface implants placed in bone of low density. Failures of this type were distributed equally between the PHP and PCP groups. The second type of failure was related to peri-implantitis. It was observed most often with implants with hydroxyapatite surfaces, occurred as the result of a progressive condition, and was most prevalent in the PCP group. CONCLUSION: Further long-term controlled investigations are needed to determine the influences of implant suface and host susceptibility on implant failure in both PHP and PCP.
机译：目的：本研究比较了牙周受损和牙周健康患者的植入物存活率和植入物失败的模式。材料和方法：在私密的牙周实践中，经过13年的时间，将植入物植入了牙周受损患者和牙周健康患者中。根据表面纹理将植入物分为5个不同的组。根据植入物的位置，直径，长度和治疗阶段比较每组的存活率。结果：334例患者中总共植入了1,511枚植入物。这些患者中有151位被归类为牙周受损患者（PCP），接受了923个植入物。其余183名被归为牙周健康患者（PHP）的患者接受了588例植入物。 PHP组中植入物的总生存率为93.7％，而PCP组中为90.6％。 PHP组和PCP组的羟基磷灰石涂层植入物生存率分别为92.6％和81％。两组的翻面植入物的存活率相似。讨论：确定了两种类型的植入物失败。首先是植入物无法骨整合。这种类型的衰竭发生在治疗的早期，似乎与放置在低密度骨中的光滑表面植入物有关。此类故障在PHP和PCP组之间平均分配。第二类失败与种植体周围炎有关。这种现象最常见于带有羟基磷灰石表面的植入物，是由进行性疾病引起的，并且在PCP组中最为普遍。结论：需要进一步的长期对照研究以确定PHP和PCP中种植体表面和宿主敏感性对种植体失败的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号