Early crestal bone loss around implants placed at previously failed sites compared with initially integrated implants: A retrospective cohort study. (23rd March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Oh, Se‐Lim; Shiau, Harlan J.; Ashour, Izoh; Chen, Hegang; Cruz, Christopher
• Is Part Of: Clinical implant dentistry and related research. Volume 24:Number 2(2022)
• Page Start: 233
• Page End: 241
• Publication Date: 2022-03-23
• Subjects: early crestal bone loss -- implant failure -- replaced implants; Dental implants -- Periodicals; Dental Implantation -- Periodicals; Dental Implants -- Periodicals; 617.693
• DOI: 10.1111/cid.13076
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1523-0899

Abstract

Abstract: Background: There is minimal information on early crestal bone loss (CBL) associated with implants placed at failed sites. Purpose: This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate CBL of surviving and restored implants placed at previously failed sites (replaced implants [RIs]) compared to that of implants initially integrated and restored (pristine implants [PIs]), within the same subjects from implant placement to 17 months post‐delivery of restoration. Methods: Subjects who had both PI(s) and RI(s) were recruited. The following data were retrieved: patient demographics, implant locations, types of implant failure, use of bone graft procedure(s), and intraoral radiographs at implant placement (T0), restoration delivery (T1), and the post‐restoration follow‐up (T2). A blinded evaluator measured crestal bone levels at T0, T1, and T2. Results: Forty‐four implants (22 in the RI and 22 in the PI group) from the 22 subjects were reviewed. The 22 implants in the RI group were placed either at early failure (17) or late failure (5) sites. There was a 4.6 times higher likelihood of bone graft procedures performed in association with RIs compared to PIs when using a generalized linear mixed model. Differences in crestal bone levels were compared between the two groups at each time point. There were no significant differences in the mesial and mean crestal bone levels between the PI and RI groups. The RI group exhibited lower crestal bone levels on the distal side compared to the PI group at all time points. However, this difference was due to crestal bone level at T0 ( p = 0.039) not due to implant replacement ( p = 0.413) or bone graft procedure ( p = 0.302) when using mixed regression modeling. Conclusion: The effect of replacements of implants at failed sites on CBL was not significant. RIs, once integrated, exhibited the same pattern of CBL as pristine implants.