Premium
Long‐term evaluation of A stra T ech and B rånemark implants in patients treated with full‐arch bridges. Results after 12–15 years
Author(s) -
Ravald Nils,
Dahlgren Simon,
Teiwik Anders,
Gröndahl Kerstin
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02524.x
Subject(s) - implant , bridge (graph theory) , medicine , dentistry , radiography , significant difference , surgery
Aim To study the long‐term outcome of implant survival rate, soft and hard tissue conditions and prosthetic status in a group of individuals treated with either A stra T ech Ti O blast or B rånemark turned implants supporting a full‐arch bridge. Material and methods Edentulous patients treated with either A stra T ech Ti O blast surface or B rånemark turned implants were recalled for examination after 12–15 years. Out of initially 66 patients 46 were available for examination. Intra‐oral radiographs were taken for bone level assessments. Clinical prosthetic conditions, number of surviving implants, implant stability, plaque scores, probing pocket depths, bleeding and pus after probing were recorded. Analyses of bone level changes during the total observation period were performed. Results Three patients in the A stra T ech group lost totally eight implants and five patients in the B rånemark group lost 10 implants during the total observation period. No statistically significant difference in implant loss or bone level change was found. Sixteen per cent of A stra T ech and 29% of B rånemark patients showed at least one implant with ≥2 mm bone loss after the first year in function. The corresponding prevalence on implant level was 6% and 5% respectively. No significant differences were found between the other examined variables. Two patients showed prosthetic complications of the supra construction in need of repair. Seven bridges had minor ceramic chippings. Conclusion Treatment with A stra T ech Ti O blast implants and B rånemark turned implants supporting full‐arch bridges showed generally good clinical results with low numbers of implants with marginal bone loss indicative of peri‐implantitis. No significant differences were found between the implant systems after 12–15 years in function.