Premium
Survival rate and potential risk indicators of implant loss in non‐smokers and systemically healthy periodontitis patients: An up to 9‐year retrospective study
Author(s) -
Wang Yiwei,
Fan Yadan,
Lin Zhikai,
Song Zhongchen,
Shu Rong,
Xie Yufeng
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of periodontal research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.31
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1600-0765
pISSN - 0022-3484
DOI - 10.1111/jre.12854
Subject(s) - medicine , implant , proportional hazards model , periodontitis , dentistry , confounding , hazard ratio , survival analysis , tooth loss , univariate analysis , surgery , multivariate analysis , confidence interval , oral health
Background An increasing number of patients with chronic periodontitis (CP) have received implant restoration. However, very few studies have evaluated the probable risk indicators of implant loss in patients with CP. Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate implant long‐term survival rates in patients with CP. The results are analyzed to discern potential risk indicators of implant loss. Methods A total of 1549 implants were inserted in 827 non‐smokers and systemically healthy CP patients between March 2011 and March 2019. Clinical variables (age; sex; implant location; implant diameter; implant length; implant type; bone quality; bone graft, periodontal disease status, and insertion torque) were recorded. Kaplan‐Meier survival curves illustrated the cumulative survival rate. The relationship between variables and implant loss was discerned by univariate analysis. Further multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was carried out for the variables with P < 0.2. Results The cumulative survival rates were 98.8% after 3 months, 97.9% after 6 months, 97.7% after 1 year, and 97.4% after 2 to 9 years. After adjusting possible confounders, the multivariable Cox regression model revealed statistically significant influences of implant location, history of bone graft, and insertion torque on implant loss. Implants with history of bone graft were more likely to loss. Implants inserted in the anterior area had a higher implant loss risk; insertion torque of <15 Newton‐centimeter (Ncm) showed a relatively high risk of being lost. Conclusions The study represented public hospital insight into long‐term implant results of patients with CP. Under the premise of strict periodontal control, patients with the history of CP exhibited relatively high implant survival rate. Anterior implant location, history of bone graft, and insertion torque <15 Ncm are associated with a lower implant survival rate and could be considered at a higher risk of implant failure in patients with CP.