Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term survival, complications, peri-implant conditions, marginal bone loss, and patient satisfaction of fixed dental prostheses supported by narrow diameter implants (NDIs) in the posterior jaws. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was designed as a retrospective cohort study with a mean follow-up time of 10.1 years (SD: 2.5 years). Patients receiving NDIs in posterior jaw were reviewed. Implant survival, hardware complication, modified plaque index (mPI), peri-implant probing depth (PPD), percentage of bleeding on probing (BOP%), marginal bone loss (MBL), and patient satisfaction were evaluated. Log-rank test and t test were used to detect the influence of implant location and restoration type. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with 98 NDIs (Premolar site: 81, Molar site: 17, Single crowns: 33, Splinted restorations: 65) were included. The overall implant survival rates were 96.9% at implant level and 97.0% at patient level. Veneer chipping was the most common hardware complication. The veneer chipping rates were 19.4% at patient level and 18.4% at implant level. All patients showed acceptable oral hygiene. Thus, the average MBL was 1.19 mm at implant level and 1.15 mm at patient level. Eight implants (8.5%) and six patients (9.2%) were diagnosed with peri-implantitis. Fifty-eight patients (89.2%) were satisfied with the esthetics of the restorations, while 55 patients (84.6%) were satisfied with the function of the restorations. CONCLUSION: Narrow diameter implants could be a predictable treatment option in the long term. High survival rates, high patient satisfaction, acceptable complication rates and marginal bone loss could be achieved. Further long-term studies are needed to evaluate the predictability of NDIs in molar sites.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: