Cost estimation of single-implant treatment in the periodontally healthy patient after 16-22 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Costs for single-implant treatment are mostly described for the initial treatment. Information on the additional cost related to aftercare is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To make an estimation of complication costs of single implants in periodontally healthy patients after 16-22 years and to compare costs for various prosthetic designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a single implant were recalled for a clinical examination and file investigation. Prosthetic designs included single-tooth (ST) and CeraOne (CO) abutments supporting a porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-ceramic (CER), or gold-acrylic (ACR) crown. Costs related to failures or technical, biologic, and aesthetic complications were retrieved from patient's records. Total and yearly additional complication costs were calculated as a percentage relative to the initial cost. Chair time needed to solve the complication was recorded and prosthetic designs were compared by Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: Fifty patients with 59 surviving implants were clinically investigated. Additional complication costs after a mean follow-up of 18.5 years amounted to 23% (range 0-110%) of the initial treatment cost. In total, 39% of implants presented with no costs, whereas 22% and 8% encountered additional costs over 50% and 75%, respectively. In 2%, the complication costs exceeded the initial cost. The mean yearly additional cost was 1.2% (range 0-6%) and mean complication time per implant was 67 min (range 0-345 min). Differences between prosthetic designs (CO, ST-PFM, ST-ACR) were statistically significant for total cost (P = 0.011), yearly cost (P = 0.023), and time (P = 0.023). Pairwise comparison revealed significant lower costs for CO compared with ST-ACR reconstructions. CONCLUSION: Patients should be informed about additional costs related to complications with single implants. The mean additional cost spent on complications was almost one-quarter of the initial treatment price. A majority of implants presented with lower additional costs, whereas the highest complication costs were related to a smaller group with 22% of the implants needing more than half of the initial cost for complication management. Expenses were significantly different for various prosthetic designs.

Implant dentistry education in Europe: 5 years after the Association for Dental Education in Europe consensus report.

INTRODUCTION: To promote consensus on implant dentistry university education in Europe, a workshop amongst university teachers and opinion leaders was organised in 2008. As a result, guidelines on both under- and postgraduate education were issued. This study aims to investigate the current status of university teaching of implant dentistry and the impact of the recommendations for teaching and assessment, 5 years after the first consensus. Finally, this report attempts to identify future directions in education within the discipline. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was distributed amongst 105 academic leaders in implant education in Europe, and 52 questionnaires were returned (response rate 50%). RESULTS: The average amount of implant dentistry in undergraduate curricula has increased to 74 h, compared to 36 h in 2008, and the inclusion of pre-clinical and clinical education has increased. No change occurred with regard to the aimed competence levels. It was suggested that certain implant procedures including surgery should be provided by dentists after attending additional courses, whilst complex treatments will still require specialist training. The 2008 workshop guidelines have been implemented to a varying extent (25-100%) in under- and postgraduate education. Main reported implementation barriers included limited time availability in the curriculum and limited financial/material resources. Future discussions about implant dentistry in Europe should be focused towards integration in current dental curricula, approaches to overcome barriers and the relations with and role of industrial partners. CONCLUSION: Implant dentistry is increasingly integrating in undergraduate dental education. Development of the consensus guidelines in 2008 may have facilitated this process. Nevertheless, further progress is needed on all educational levels to align training of professionals to the growing treatment needs of the population.

Dental implants placed by undergraduate students: clinical outcomes and patients'/students' perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: Implant dentistry in undergraduate education is predominantly theoretical or prosthetics oriented. Clinical experience with implant surgery could provide students a better understanding of alternatives for tooth replacements. This study describes an implant dentistry programme for undergraduate students, which included surgical placement of implants. The study presents the clinical outcomes of the programme, patients' satisfaction and students' attitudes/perceptions. It reflects on barriers and problems encountered during implementation and provides suggestions for other institutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six students placed one implant each for a single tooth replacement after careful radiographic assessment and pre-surgical planning. One-stage surgery was performed under one-to-one supervision. Crowns were cemented on individual abutments 3-6 months later. Crestal bone loss was assessed radiographically immediately after surgery, at crown placement and after 1 year of loading. Questionnaires were used to investigate patients' perspectives and students' opinions towards the programme, as well as their perceived level of competence. RESULTS: Thirty-six implants were placed in 27 patients; two (5.6%) failed prior to loading; mean bone loss from time of surgery to crown placement was 1.41 mm and remained unchanged thereafter, reflecting implant success. Overall, patients were satisfied and the majority would repeat the treatment by a student. The students thought it was a valuable experience, although they realised that additional education is necessary to perform implant surgery without supervision. CONCLUSION: Implant placement by undergraduate students resulted in acceptable clinical outcome parameters, patient satisfaction and positive student perceptions. These findings support the further development of clinical implant education in undergraduate dental curricula.

Bone apposition to laminin-1 coated implants: histologic and 3D evaluation.

Laminin-1 has been reported as one of the factors responsible for the nucleation of calcium phosphates and, in vitro, has been reported to selectively recruit osteoprogenitors. This article focused on its in vivo effects, and evaluated the effect of laminin-1 local application on osseointegration. Polished cylindrical hydroxyapatite implants were coated with laminin-1 (test) and the bone responses in the rabbit tibiae after 2 and 4 weeks were evaluated and compared to the non-coated implants (control). Before the samples were processed for histological sectioning, they were three-dimensionally analysed with micro computed tomography (µCT). Both evaluation methods were analysed with regards to bone area around the implant and bone to implant contact. From the histologic observation, new bone formation around the laminin-1 coated implant at 2 weeks seemed to have increased the amount of supporting bone around the implant, however, at 4 weeks, the two groups presented no notable differences. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional morphometric evaluation revealed that both histologic and three-dimensional analysis showed some tendency in favour of the test group implants, however there was no statistical significance between the test and control group results.

Nano hydroxyapatite-coated implants improve bone nanomechanical properties.

Nanostructure modification of dental implants has long been sought as a means to improve osseointegration through enhanced biomimicry of host structures. Several methods have been proposed and demonstrated for creating nanotopographic features; here we describe a nanoscale hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implant surface and hypothesize that it will hasten osseointegration and improve its quality relative to that of non-coated implants. Twenty threaded titanium alloy implants, half prepared with a stable HA nanoparticle surface and half grit-blasted, acid-etched, and heat-treated (HT), were inserted into rabbit femurs. Pre-operatively, the implants were morphologically and topographically characterized. After 3 weeks of healing, the samples were retrieved for histomorphometry. The nanomechanical properties of the surrounding bone were evaluated by nanoindentation. While both implants revealed similar bone-to-implant contact, the nanoindentation demonstrated that the tissue quality was significantly enhanced around the HA-coated implants, validating the postulated hypothesis.

Characteristics of implant-CAD/CAM abutment connections of two different internal connection systems.

Titanium or zirconium computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing abutments are now widely used for aesthetic implant treatments; however, information regarding microscopic structural differences that may influence the biological and mechanical outcomes of different implant systems is limited. Therefore, the characteristics of different connection systems were investigated. Optical microscopic observation and scanning electron microscopy showed different characteristics of two internal systems, namely the Astra Tech and the Replace Select system, and for different materials. The scanning electron microscopic observation showed for the Astra Tech that the implant-abutment interface seemed to be completely sealed for both titanium and zirconium abutments, both horizontally and sagittally; however, the first implant-abutment contact was below the fixture top, creating a microgap, and fixtures connected with titanium abutments showed significantly larger values (23·56µm±5·44 in width, and 168·78µm±30·39 in depth, P<0·001). For Replace Select, scanning electron microscopy in the sagittal direction showed that the sealing of titanium and zirconium abutments differed. The seal between the implant-titanium and implant-zirconium abutments seemed to be complete at the butt-joint interface; however, the displacement of the abutment in relation to the fixture in the lateral direction was evident for both abutments with no statistical differences (P>0·70), creating an inverted microgap. Thus, microscopy evaluation of two commonly used internal systems connected to titanium or zirconium abutments showed that the implant-abutment interface was perfectly sealed under no-loading conditions. However, an inverted microgap was seen in both systems, which may result in bacterial accumulation as well as alteration of stress distribution at the implant-abutment interface.

Long-term follow-up of turned single implants placed in periodontally healthy patients after 16-22 years: radiographic and peri-implant outcome.

OBJECTIVES: Retrospectively evaluate the survival, radiographic and peri-implant outcome of single turned Brånemark™ implants after at least 16 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 134 patients (C-group), 101 could be contacted concerning implant survival and 50 (59 remaining implants) were clinically examined (I-group). Marginal bone level was radiographically measured from the implant-abutment junction at baseline (=within 6 months after abutment connection) and 1-4, 5-8 and 16-22 years post-operatively. Probing depth, gingival and plaque index were measured. Marginal bone-level changes were analyzed using Friedman's and Wilcoxon's signed ranks tests. Spearman's correlations between radiographic and clinical parameters were calculated. RESULTS: In the C-group, 13 out of 166 implants in 11 out of 134 patients failed (CSR=91.5%). In the I-group (28 males-22 females; mean age 23.9 years at baseline; range 14-57), the mean follow-up was 18.4 years (range 16-22). The mean bone level was 1.7±0.88 mm (range -0.8 to 5) after 16-22 years. Changes in the mean marginal bone level were statistically significant between baseline and the second measuring interval (1-4 years). Thereafter, no significant differences could be demonstrated. The mean interproximal probing depth, gingival and plaque indices were 3.9±1.27 mm, 1.2±0.81 and 0.2±0.48, respectively. Probing depth was moderately correlated with gingival inflammation (r=0.6; P<0.001) but not with bone level (P>0.05). 81.4% of the implants had a bone level ≤2nd thread and 91.5% had a probing depth ≤5 mm. 76.3% had both bone level ≤2nd thread and probing depth ≤5 mm. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The single turned Brånemark™ implant is a predictable solution with high clinical survival and success rates. In general, a steady-state bone level can be expected over decades, with minimal signs of peri-implant disease. A minority (5%), however, presents with progressive bone loss.