Abstract
PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies of two-implant splinting (2-IS) and single-implant restoration (1-IR) in the first and second molar regions over a mean functional loading period (FLP) of 40 months, and to propose the appropriate clinical considerations for the splinting technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The following clinical factors were examined in the 1-IR and 2-IS groups based on the total hospital records of the patients: sex, mean age, implant location, FLP, bone grafting, clinical crown-implant ratio, crown height space, and horizontal distance. The mechanical complications [i.e., screw loosening (SL), screw fracture, crown fracture, and repeated SL] and biological complications [i.e., peri-implant mucositis (PM) and peri-implantitis (PI)] were also evaluated for each patient. In analysis of two groups, the chi-square test and Student's t-test were used to identify the relationship between clinical factors and complication rates. The optimal cutoff value for the FLP based on complications was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics analysis. RESULTS. In total, 234 patients with 408 implants that had been placed during 2005 - 2014 were investigated. The incident rates of SL (P < .001), PM (P=.002), and PI (P=.046) differed significantly between the 1-IR and 2-IS groups. The FLP was the only meaningful clinical factor for mechanical and biological complication rates in 2-IS. CONCLUSION. The mechanical complication rates were lower for 2-IS than for 1-IR, while the biological complication rates were higher for 2-IS. FLP of 39.80 and 46.57 months were the reference follow-up periods for preventing biological and mechanical complications, respectively.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 494-503 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 Jan 1 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Oral Surgery
- Dentistry (miscellaneous)
Cite this
}
The prognosis of splinted restoration of the most-distal implants in the posterior region. / Lee, Jong Bin; Kim, Man Yong; Kim, ChangSung; Kim, Young Taek.
In: Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, Vol. 8, No. 6, 01.01.2016, p. 494-503.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - The prognosis of splinted restoration of the most-distal implants in the posterior region
AU - Lee, Jong Bin
AU - Kim, Man Yong
AU - Kim, ChangSung
AU - Kim, Young Taek
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies of two-implant splinting (2-IS) and single-implant restoration (1-IR) in the first and second molar regions over a mean functional loading period (FLP) of 40 months, and to propose the appropriate clinical considerations for the splinting technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The following clinical factors were examined in the 1-IR and 2-IS groups based on the total hospital records of the patients: sex, mean age, implant location, FLP, bone grafting, clinical crown-implant ratio, crown height space, and horizontal distance. The mechanical complications [i.e., screw loosening (SL), screw fracture, crown fracture, and repeated SL] and biological complications [i.e., peri-implant mucositis (PM) and peri-implantitis (PI)] were also evaluated for each patient. In analysis of two groups, the chi-square test and Student's t-test were used to identify the relationship between clinical factors and complication rates. The optimal cutoff value for the FLP based on complications was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics analysis. RESULTS. In total, 234 patients with 408 implants that had been placed during 2005 - 2014 were investigated. The incident rates of SL (P < .001), PM (P=.002), and PI (P=.046) differed significantly between the 1-IR and 2-IS groups. The FLP was the only meaningful clinical factor for mechanical and biological complication rates in 2-IS. CONCLUSION. The mechanical complication rates were lower for 2-IS than for 1-IR, while the biological complication rates were higher for 2-IS. FLP of 39.80 and 46.57 months were the reference follow-up periods for preventing biological and mechanical complications, respectively.
AB - PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies of two-implant splinting (2-IS) and single-implant restoration (1-IR) in the first and second molar regions over a mean functional loading period (FLP) of 40 months, and to propose the appropriate clinical considerations for the splinting technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The following clinical factors were examined in the 1-IR and 2-IS groups based on the total hospital records of the patients: sex, mean age, implant location, FLP, bone grafting, clinical crown-implant ratio, crown height space, and horizontal distance. The mechanical complications [i.e., screw loosening (SL), screw fracture, crown fracture, and repeated SL] and biological complications [i.e., peri-implant mucositis (PM) and peri-implantitis (PI)] were also evaluated for each patient. In analysis of two groups, the chi-square test and Student's t-test were used to identify the relationship between clinical factors and complication rates. The optimal cutoff value for the FLP based on complications was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics analysis. RESULTS. In total, 234 patients with 408 implants that had been placed during 2005 - 2014 were investigated. The incident rates of SL (P < .001), PM (P=.002), and PI (P=.046) differed significantly between the 1-IR and 2-IS groups. The FLP was the only meaningful clinical factor for mechanical and biological complication rates in 2-IS. CONCLUSION. The mechanical complication rates were lower for 2-IS than for 1-IR, while the biological complication rates were higher for 2-IS. FLP of 39.80 and 46.57 months were the reference follow-up periods for preventing biological and mechanical complications, respectively.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007268639&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85007268639&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.494
DO - 10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.494
M3 - Article
VL - 8
SP - 494
EP - 503
JO - Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
JF - Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
SN - 2005-7806
IS - 6
ER -