The long-term effect of smoking on 10 years’ survival and success of dental implants : a prospective analysis of 453 implants in a non-university setting

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the survival and peri-implant bone loss of implants with a fluoride-modified surface in smokers and non-smokers. Material and Methods: All patients referred for implant treatment between November 2004 and 2007 were scrutinized. All implants were placed by the same surgeon (B.C.). The single inclusion criterion was a follow-up time of at least 10 years. Implant survival, health, and bone loss were evaluated by an external calibrated examiner (S.W.) during recall visits. Radiographs taken at recall visits were compared with the post-surgical ones. Implant success was based on two arbitrarily chosen success criteria for bone loss (<= 1 mm and <= 2 mm bone loss after 10 years). Implant survival in smokers and non-smokers was compared using the log-rank test. Both non-parametric tests and fixed model analysis were used to assess bone loss in both groups. Results: A total of 453 implants in 121 patients were included for survival analysis, and 397 implants in 121 patients were included for peri-implant bone-loss analysis. After a mean follow-up time of 11.38 years (SD 0.78; range 10.00-13.65), 33 implants out of 453 initially placed had failed in 21 patients, giving an overall survival rate of 92.7% and 82.6% on the implant and patient level, respectively. Cumulative 10 years' survival rate was 81% on the patient level and 91% on the implant level. The hazard of implant loss in the maxilla was 5.64 times higher in smokers compared to non-smokers (p = 0.003). The hazard of implant loss for implants of non-smokers was 2.92 times higher in the mandible compared to the maxilla (p = 0.01). The overall mean bone loss was 0.97 mm (SD 1.79, range 0-17) at the implant level and 0.90 mm (SD 1.39, range 0-7.85) at the patient level. Smokers lost significantly more bone compared to non-smokers in the maxilla (p = 0.024) but not in the mandible. Only the maxilla showed a significant difference in the probability of implant success between smokers and non-smokers (<= 1 mm criterion p = 0.003, <= 2 mm criterion p = 0.007). Taking jaw into account, implants in smokers experienced a 2.6 higher risk of developing peri-implantitis compared to non-smokers (p = 0.053). Conclusion: Dental implants with a fluoride-modified surface provided a high 10 years' survival with limited bone loss. Smokers were, however, more prone to peri-implant bone loss and experienced a higher rate of implant failure, especially in the upper jaw. The overall bone loss over time was significantly higher in smoking patients, which might be suggestive for a higher peri-implantitis risk. Hence, smoking cessation should be advised and maintained after implant placement from the perspective of peri-implant disease prevention

The 5 EAO Consensus Conference 7-10 February 2018, Pfäffikon, Schwyz, Switzerland

Article, editorial lette

Ten-year follow-up of dental implants used for immediate loading in the edentulous mandible : a prospective clinical study

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the 10-year outcome of 25 patients with immediate loading in the edentulous mandible. Material and Methods: Twenty-five patients were consecutively treated with 5 immediately loaded fluoride-modified implants in the edentulous mandible. Implant survival and bone loss were evaluated by an external researcher comparing digital periapical radiographs taken during recall visits with baseline (at implant insertion). Statistical descriptive analysis and nonparametric tests were performed using SPSS v23, multilevel analysis was performed by means of R version 3.1.0. to identify risk factors for bone loss. Results: Twenty-one patients (8 males, 13 females, mean age 68.4, range 49-84) responded to the 10-year recall invitation. No implants were lost during follow-up, resulting in a 100% survival rate. After 10 years, bleeding on probing and plaque were present at 49.5% and 67.6% of the sites, respectively. The mean pocket probing depth was 3.77 mm (SD 0.73, range 3.0-6.83). Bone loss on implant level after 3, 12, 24, and 120 months was 0.16 mm (SD 0.33, range 0-1.75), 0.14 mm (SD 0.24, range 0-1.05), 0.17 mm (SD 0.27, range 0-1.5), and 0.49 mm (SD 1.08, range 0-7.8). Five implants were identified with or at risk for progressive bone loss. Forty-seven percent of the implants did not show any bone loss after 10 years in function and 87% lost less than 1 mm. Multilevel statistical analysis identified 2-year bone loss as a predictor for bone loss after 10 years of function. Conclusion: Immediate loading of 5 fluoride-modified dental implants with a fixed prosthetic rehabilitation is a predictable and reliable treatment in the edentulous mandible, based on a 100% implant survival and limited peri-implant bone loss. Implants used for immediate loading in the edentulous mandible who are showing early bone loss may be at higher risk to develop peri-implantitis

Early peri‐implant bone loss as a predictor for peri‐implantitis : a 10‐year prospective cohort study

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of early bone loss (EBL), on long-term bone stability and future peri-implantitis development. Materials and methods: Patients referred for implant placement between 2005 and 2009 were consecutively treated and followed for 10 years. After 10 years, patients were invited for a scientific diagnostic visit to evaluate implant survival and bone loss. Bone level changes were compared with baseline. Non-parametric testing was performed in cross-tabs (Pearson Chi-square and Fishers's exact test). Kaplan-Meier-estimated survival curves were plotted for different thresholds for EBL at different timepoints. Generalized linear mixed models with binomial distribution and logit link for peri-implantitis were fitted. An adjusted logistic mixed model was made to evaluate peri-implantitis, in relation with smoking status, history of periodontitis, and EBL > 0.5 mm. Results: Four hundred and seven patients (mean age of 64.86 years [range 28-92, SD 10.11]), with 1482 implants, responded to the 10-year recall invitation. After an average follow-up time of 10.66 years (range 10-14, SD 0.87), implant survival was 94.74%. Mean crestal bone loss after 10 years was 0.81 mm (SD 1.58, range 0.00-17.00). One hundred and seventy five implants in 76 patients had peri-implantitis (11.8% on implant level, 18.7% on patient level). EBL of 0.5, 1, and 2 mm were significant predictors for peri-implantitis and implant loss after 10 years. Implants with EBL >= 0.5 mm during the first year of function showed a 5.43 times higher odds for future peri-implantitis development. Probability in developing peri-implantitis was 52.06% when smoking, Periodontal history and EBL of >0.5 mm was combined. Conclusion: The present study suggests that EBL is a predictor for long-term peri-implant pathology, with a significant higher risk for peri-implantitis when early bone loss exceeds the thresholds of 0.5 and 1 mm, especially when additional risk factors such as smoking or susceptibility for periodontal disease prior to implant treatment are present

The Long-Term Effect of Smoking on 10 Years' Survival and Success of Dental Implants: A Prospective Analysis of 453 Implants in a Non-University Setting

Contains fulltext : 220567.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the survival and peri-implant bone loss of implants with a fluoride-modified surface in smokers and non-smokers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients referred for implant treatment between November 2004 and 2007 were scrutinized. All implants were placed by the same surgeon (B.C.). The single inclusion criterion was a follow-up time of at least 10 years. Implant survival, health, and bone loss were evaluated by an external calibrated examiner (S.W.) during recall visits. Radiographs taken at recall visits were compared with the post-surgical ones. Implant success was based on two arbitrarily chosen success criteria for bone loss (</=1 mm and </=2 mm bone loss after 10 years). Implant survival in smokers and non-smokers was compared using the log-rank test. Both non-parametric tests and fixed model analysis were used to assess bone loss in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 453 implants in 121 patients were included for survival analysis, and 397 implants in 121 patients were included for peri-implant bone-loss analysis. After a mean follow-up time of 11.38 years (SD 0.78; range 10.00-13.65), 33 implants out of 453 initially placed had failed in 21 patients, giving an overall survival rate of 92.7% and 82.6% on the implant and patient level, respectively. Cumulative 10 years' survival rate was 81% on the patient level and 91% on the implant level. The hazard of implant loss in the maxilla was 5.64 times higher in smokers compared to non-smokers (p = 0.003). The hazard of implant loss for implants of non-smokers was 2.92 times higher in the mandible compared to the maxilla (p = 0.01). The overall mean bone loss was 0.97 mm (SD 1.79, range 0-17) at the implant level and 0.90 mm (SD 1.39, range 0-7.85) at the patient level. Smokers lost significantly more bone compared to non-smokers in the maxilla (p = 0.024) but not in the mandible. Only the maxilla showed a significant difference in the probability of implant success between smokers and non-smokers (</=1 mm criterion p = 0.003, </=2 mm criterion p = 0.007). Taking jaw into account, implants in smokers experienced a 2.6 higher risk of developing peri-implantitis compared to non-smokers (p = 0.053). CONCLUSION: Dental implants with a fluoride-modified surface provided a high 10 years' survival with limited bone loss. Smokers were, however, more prone to peri-implant bone loss and experienced a higher rate of implant failure, especially in the upper jaw. The overall bone loss over time was significantly higher in smoking patients, which might be suggestive for a higher peri-implantitis risk. Hence, smoking cessation should be advised and maintained after implant placement from the perspective of peri-implant disease prevention