Home  About us  Contact
 

Implant Success (implant + success)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Terms modified by Implant Success

  • implant success rate
    		•

    Selected Abstracts

    Long-term Stability of Endocardial Left Ventricular Pacing Leads Placed via the Coronary Sinus

    PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, Issue 9 2009
    GRACE LIN M.D.
    Background: Left ventricular endocardial pacing leads placed via the coronary sinus (CS) are increasingly implanted to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT); however, the long-term stability of these leads is unknown. We sought to determine the implant success and long-term stability of CS leads in our single center experience. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent CRT via implantation of the CS lead between January 1999 and December 2005 were included. Pacing thresholds at implant and during long-term follow-up were reviewed and the rate of acute (within 24 hours of implant) and chronic (>24 hours) lead failure was determined. Results: A total of 512 patients (mean age 68 ± 12 years; 409 [80%] male) underwent CRT device implantation and were included. The CS lead implantation was successful on the initial implantation in 487 patients (95%) and subsequently successful in six patients (24%) in whom initial attempts were unsuccessful. Acute lead failure occurred in 25 patients (5.1%) and was most commonly due to persistent extra-cardiac stimulation. The rate of chronic lead failure was 4% in the first year and remained stable during long-term follow-up. The CS lead pacing thresholds remained stable with only minimal increase (1.42 ± 0.85 V/0.42 ± 0.25 ms vs 1.51 ± 1.05 V/0.47 ± 0.29 ms; P = 0.04). Conclusions: Placement of a left ventricular pacing lead via the CS is feasible and safe in the vast majority of patients. Once placed, the CS leads remain stable with excellent pacing thresholds over the longer term. [source]

    A retrospective analysis of 1000 consecutively placed implants in private practice

    AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL, Issue 2 2009
    KC Nixon
    Abstract Background:, There have been numerous reports evaluating clinical outcomes of implants placed in institutional settings, but there are few studies relating to implants placed in private practice. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyse the clinical outcomes of 1000 consecutively placed Straumann implants in private specialist periodontal practice. Methods:, A hand-search of patient records was undertaken to identify 1000 consecutively placed implants. Data extracted included patient demographics, details of implants placed, implant sites, timing of placement after extraction, hard and soft tissue augmentation procedures, loading protocols, type of prostheses and treatment outcomes (implant survival, implant success and complications). Results:, The majority of implants (71.5 per cent) placed in patients aged 40 to 69, and the majority of patients (88.6 per cent) received 1 or 2 implants. During the period of the study, 9 implants were lost and 45 presented with complications requiring chairside intervention. A life table analysis showed 5 and 10-year cumulative survival rates of 99.2 per cent and 98.4 per cent respectively, and 5 and 10-year cumulative success rates of 93.1 per cent and 90.9 per cent respectively. Conclusions:, With careful treatment planning and adherence to recommended surgical and prosthetic protocols, high implant survival and success rates can be achieved in a private practice setting. [source]

    Clinical Outcome of Overdenture Treatment on Two Nonsubmerged and Nonsplinted Astra Tech MicrothreadŌ Implants

    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2 2009
    Hugo De Bruyn DDS
    ABSTRACT Background: The use of two implants for mandibular overdenture stabilization improves the patients' comfort and well-being. This treatment could be more cost-effective if surgery and prosthetic treatment could be performed by one clinician in the normal setting of a dental clinic. Purpose: The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to describe implant success, restorative outcome, and the patients' opinion of mandibular overdenture treatment on two early-loaded, nonsplinted Astra Tech TiOblast MicrothreadŌ (Astra Tech Dental, Mölndal, Sweden) implants. Materials and Methods: Thirty-seven consecutive patients treated with implant-supported mandibular overdentures were invited for a clinical examination. Implant survival, marginal bone level, quality of implant and prosthetic treatment, and the patients' opinion by means of questionnaires were scored. Results: Thirty-four patients attended the examination. Two implants were lost in one patient and the failure rate for the total group of patients was 3%. As 8 of the 33 remaining patients were still in the provisional loading stage, they were not included in the final clinical and radiographic examination. Based on 25 patients and 50 implants with a mean follow-up of 18.8 months (range 4,33), implant positioning and occlusion/articulation scored perfect in 74 to 80% of the cases. Retention of the dentures was rated perfect in 80%, but 20% needed minor activation of the attachments, 20% showed signs of abrasion, and 20% had already been repaired. The average marginal bone level was 0.8 mm below the reference point. The mean pocket depth was 2.1 mm, and 54% of the peri-implant tissues were free of bleeding. The patients were appreciative of the work carried out by their dentist and they indicated a significant improvement in their well-being and quality of life. Conclusions: It can be concluded that the Astra Tech implant system was successfully used by the general dentist both surgically and prosthetically with minimal implant failures and prosthetic complications and that this led to high levels of patient appreciation and overall satisfaction. [source]

    Turned, Machined Versus Double-Etched Dental Implants In Vivo

    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 2 2007
    B. Al-Nawas Priv.-Doz., DrMed, DrMedDent
    ABSTRACT Background:, Positive effects on the clinical outcome of moderately rough implant surfaces are described. Intercomparison of clinical data, however, is rarely found. Purpose:, The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of two macroscopically identical implants, the one with a turned, machined and the other with an etched surface. Materials and Methods:, In a retrospective cohort study, the included implants followed the criteria: standard surgical protocol, >12 months in situ; minimally rough self-threading implants with a turned, machined surface (Mk IITM Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden], n=210); etched implants of the same macrodesign (3iTM Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, FL, USA], n=151), length , 10 mm. Clinical data and implant success were rated. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and Periotest® (Siemens AG, Bensheim, Germany) were measured and related to the corresponding implant survival rate in the respective group. Results:, The total number of implants was 361, of which 264 (73%) were subject to clinical reexamination. RFA and Periotest could be recorded in 25% of the implants. Neither clinically relevant nor statistically significant differences between the surface designs were found in the RFA (64 ± 8.6 vs 63 ± 9.7), in Periotest (,2 ± 3.3 vs ,1 ± 5.1), and in mean survival periods (49 months, 95% confidence interval CI]: 46,51 months, for the turned vs 46 months, 95% CI: 43,49 months, for the double-etched implant). After osteoplastic procedures, a significantly higher rate of implant losses in the turned, machined implant group was observed (17 vs 1) with a mean survival period of 43 (40,46) months for the turned and 46 (45,48) months for the double-etched implants. Conclusion:, No difference between implants with two different minimally rough surfaces was found. A positive effect of surface roughness is observed in poor quality bone, but the pivotal proof of this effect is still lacking. [source]

    Implant-supported fixed cantilever prosthesis in partially edentulous jaws: a cohort prospective study

    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, Issue 11 2009
    Eugenio Romeo
    Abstract: Background: Reconstructive procedures present a higher rate of biological costs due to the necessity of bone harvest and grafts, use of semipermeable barriers etc. On the hand, implant supported cantilever prostheses could allow a simpler rehabilitation procedure. Aims: The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical outcome of patients treated with implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPD) with cantilever after a mean follow-up time of 8 years. Material and methods: The study included 45 consecutive partially edentulous patients treated between January 1994 and August 2006 with 59 partial cantilever fixed prostheses supported by 116 ITI® implants. The primary outcome variable considered was the presence of complications at the subject and bridge level; the secondary outcome variable was marginal bone loss (MBL). The frequency of complications was analyzed according to cantilever location and opposite dentition and tested by Fisher's exact test. A multilevel regression model was constructed to analyze the factors influencing MBL with three levels: subject as the highest, and then implant and site. During the follow-up period, 11 implants showed a bone loss exceeding the limit for success, out of which two implants showed an infection of the peri-implant tissue. Results: After an average observation of 8.2 years of cantilever prostheses loading, the implant success and survival rates were 90.5% and 100%, respectively. Besides, the prosthetic success and survival rate were 57.7% and 100%, respectively. Discussion: None of the predictors included in the multilevel model presented a significant impact on the bone loss between baseline and the follow-up examination. Conclusions: The authors concluded that the prognosis of implant-supported FPDs and marginal bone loss at implants were not influenced by the position or the length of the cantilever, the location of the bridge and type of opposite dentition. Implant-supported fixed cantilever prosthesis can be considered a suitable treatment choice. [source]