Abstract Objectives Global population aging is leading to a greater retention of natural teeth into later life and an increasing prevalence of dental implant therapy. Although advanced age has traditionally been regarded as a risk factor for compromised outcomes, population level evidence remains lacking. This review synthesizes large‐scale clinical and population‐level studies to evaluate whether chronological age constitutes a genuine limiting factor for periodontal and implant treatment. Materials and Methods This review compared tooth loss rates, periodontal soft and hard tissue status, and treatment outcomes between younger and older cohorts. Regarding implant therapy, the assessment primarily evaluated success and survival rates across various time periods, peri‐implant bone loss, relevant clinical parameters, as well as implant allergies, peri‐implantitis, and peri‐implant mucositis. Furthermore, data on orthopedic implants were analyzed to provide a comparative perspective on age‐related biomaterial integration. Results Periodontal treatments remain significantly effective, although outcomes of non‐surgical periodontal therapy vary among different age groups. Surgical periodontal therapy outcomes show no significant age‐related differences. Advanced age is not consistently associated with higher implant failure rates. Several studies report comparable or even higher survival rates in older patients. Marginal bone loss and probing depths are similar across age groups. Orthopedic implant literature similarly shows that age alone does not preclude successful outcomes. Conclusions Aging is not a contraindication for periodontal or implant therapy and is not a default risk factor for failure. Thorough evaluation of systemic health and individualized treatment planning are more critical for overall treatment success than a patient’s chronological age.
Yang et al. (Fri,) studied this question.