| 0873 6x6 mm Implants: Survival Estimates and Risk Factors for Failure | ||
|
M.A. GENTILE1, S.-K. CHUANG2, and T.B. DODSON2, 1 Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA, 2 Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, USA Introduction: Short dental implants facilitate prosthetic restoration in the setting of limited alveolar bone height. Few data exist to support the clinical use of short implants. We hypothesize that 6x6 implants are a clinically acceptable option when indicated. Objectives: The study objectives are to: 1)estimate the one-year survival of Bicon® 6x6 mm implants, 2)identify risk factors associated with 6x6 implant failure, and 3) compare the one-year survival of 6x6 implants with non-6x6 implants. Methods: We used a retrospective cohort study design and a sample composed of patients having ³ one 6x6 implant placed. Predictor variables were categorized as demographic, health status, anatomic, implant-specific, prosthetic, perioperative, and reconstructive. The outcome variable was implant failure defined as explantation. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to assess implant survival. Appropriate bivariate and multivariate (Cox proportional hazards) survival statistics were computed. Results: The sample was composed of 35 patient having 172 implants placed (45 6x6 and 127 non-6x6). The one-year survival of 6x6 and non-6x6 implants was 92.18% and 95.24%, respectively (p=0.78). Bivariate analyses identified staging and reconstruction as risk factors for failure. After adjusting for covariates in a multivariate model, single-stage implant placement was found to be a statistically significant (p=0.047) risk factor for implant failure. Conclusions: We believe this to be the first study reporting on clinical outcomes of the Bicon® 6x6 implant. The survival of 6x6 implants was comparable to that of non-6x6 implants. These data support the hypothesis that 6x6 implants are a clinically acceptable option to facilitate prosthetic restoration in the setting of limited alveolar height. In addition, the results suggest that a two-stage approach is preferred when placing these implants. Funding sources - OMS Foundation Fellowship in Clinical Investigation (S-KC), NIH-NIDCR K24 DE00448 (TBD), MGH Department of OMS Research Fund (MAG) | ||
| Seq #116 - Wound Healing and Tissue Repair/ Dental Implants 9:00 AM-11:00 AM, Friday, 14 March 2003 Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center Room 214C | ||
|
Back to the Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Program
| ||