Abstract
Modern immediate titanium implants have two major drawbacks which are the black metal appearance that might be seen through the mucosa and the gap between implant and extraction socket. Immediate anatomical zirconia implants were introduced to match the shape of the extracted root and fill the socket without gaps while still providing better metal-free appearance. Aim: This study aims to investigate success and survival rates of immediate anatomical zirconia implants. Methods: This prospective interventional study was held between 2017 and 2020 in the faculty of dental medicine, Damascus University, Syria. The sample consisted of 27 immediate anatomical zirconia implants in 21 patients from both genders. Implants were designed and manufactured starting from CBCT image and prior to extraction. Specialized software applications were used to modify implant design. Implants went through different processing procedures to make them ready for insertion immediately after tooth extraction. Restorations were made after a minimum period of 3 months, clinical and radiographic follow ups were performed after 10 - 13.5 months from restoring the implants in order to evaluate their success/ survival. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess marginal bone loss, t test for probing depth assessment. Results: Immediate anatomical zirconia implants showed success in (n=17) 63% of total cases, satisfactory survival (n=3) 11.1%, compromised survival (n=2) 7.4% and they failed in (n=5) 18.5%. Conclusions: Immediate anatomical zirconia implants had low success/survival rates when compared to conventional immediate implants. Therefore, they cannot be considered as a predictable alternative in their current form.
Publisher
Universidade Estadual de Campinas
Reference25 articles.
1. Telleman G, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. Long-term evaluation of hollow screw and hollow cylinder dental implants: clinical and radiographic results after 10 years. J Periodontol. 2006 Feb;77(2):203-10. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.040346.
2. Chen ST, Buser D. Clinical and esthetic outcomes of implants placed in postextraction sites. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24 Suppl:186-217.
3. Schropp L, Wenzel A, Spin-Neto R, Stavropoulos A. Fate of the buccal bone at implants placed early, delayed, or late after tooth extraction analyzed by cone beam CT: 10-year results from a randomized, controlled, clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 May;26(5):492-500. doi: 10.1111/clr.12424.
4. Pirker W, Kocher A. Immediate, non-submerged, root-analogue zirconia implants placed into single-rooted extraction sockets: 2-year follow-up of a clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Nov;38(11):1127-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2009.07.008.
5. Becker MJ. Ancient "dental implants": a recently proposed example from France evaluated with other spurious examples. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999 Jan-Feb;14(1):19-29.