Investigation of the risk factors associated with the survival rate of dental implants.

PURPOSE: The propose of this article was to evaluate the risk factors associated with the survival rate of the dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated the survival rate of 940 implants placed at the Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul University, from January 2003 to January 2011. The potential risk factors associated with the survival rate of the implants were investigated. RESULTS: Fifteen (1.5%) of the 940 implants failed during the follow-up period. Smoking did not affect the survival rate of the implants (log-rank, 1.5; P = 0.219). The survival rate of the implants placed in the maxilla was lower than that of the implants placed in the mandible (log-rank, 4.81; P = 0.028). The 5-year survival rate of the dental implants was 98.5%. CONCLUSIONS: There are still conflicting results about the risk factors associated with the survival rate of the implants. According to the results of this study, it is concluded that only the location of the implants is associated with the survival rates of the implants. All implant systems showed high survival rates.

A comparative evaluation of pain and anxiety levels in 2 different anesthesia techniques: locoregional anesthesia using conventional syringe versus intraosseous anesthesia using a computer-controlled system (Quicksleeper).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare anxiety and pain levels during anesthesia and efficacy of Quicksleeper intraosseous (IO) injection system, which delivers computer-controlled IO anesthesia and conventional inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) in impacted mandibular third molars. STUDY DESIGN: Forty subjects with bilateral impacted mandibular third molars randomly received IO injection or conventional IANB at 2 successive appointments. The subjects received 1.8 mL 2% articaine. RESULTS: IO injection has many advantages, such as enabling painless anesthesia with less soft tissue numbness and quick onset of anesthesia as well as lingual and palatal anesthesia with single needle penetration. CONCLUSIONS: Although IO injection is a useful technique commonly used during various treatments in dentistry, the duration of injection takes longer than conventional techniques, there is a possibility of obstruction at the needle tip, and, the duration of the anesthetic effect is inadequate for prolonged surgical procedures.