Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Oct 12;13(20):4511.
doi: 10.3390/ma13204511.

Factors Affecting Implant Failure and Marginal Bone Loss of Implants Placed by Post-Graduate Students: A 1-Year Prospective Cohort Study

Gian Maria Ragucci  1 , Maria Giralt-Hernando  1 , Irene Méndez-Manjón  1 , Oriol Cantó-Navés  2 , Federico Hernández-Alfaro  1   3
Affiliations

Factors Affecting Implant Failure and Marginal Bone Loss of Implants Placed by Post-Graduate Students: A 1-Year Prospective Cohort Study

Gian Maria Ragucci et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

Statement of the problem: Most of the clinical documentation of implant success and survival published in the literature have been issued by either experienced teams from university settings involving strict patient selection criteria or from seasoned private practitioners. By contrast, studies focusing on implants placed and rehabilitated by inexperienced post-graduate students are scarce.

Purpose: To record failure rates and identify the contributing factors to implant failure and marginal bone loss (MBL) of implants placed and rehabilitated by inexperienced post-graduate students at the one-year follow-up.

Material and methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted on study participants scheduled for implant therapy at the International University of Catalonia. An experienced mentor determined the treatment plan in accordance with the need of each participant who signed an informed consent. All surgeries and prosthetic rehabilitation were performed by the post-graduate students. Implant failure rate, contributors to implant failure, and MBL were investigated among 24 variables related to patient health, local site, and implant and prosthetic characteristics. The risk of implant failure was analyzed with a simple binary logistic regression model with generalized equation equations (GEE) models, obtaining unadjusted odds ratios (OR). The relationship between MBL and the other independent variables was studied by simple linear regression estimated with GEE models and the Wald chi2 test.

Results: One hundred and thirty dental implants have been placed and rehabilitated by post-graduate students. Five implants failed before loading and none after restoration delivery; survival and success rates were 96.15% and 94.62%, respectively. None of the investigated variables significantly affected the implant survival rate. At the one-year follow-up, the mean (SD) MBL was 0.53 (0.39) mm. The following independent variables significantly affected the MBL: Diabetes, implant depth placement. The width of keratinized tissue (KT) and probing depth (PD) above 3 mm were found to be good indicators of MBL, with each additional mm of probing depth resulting in 0.11 mm more MBL.

Conclusion: The survival and success rates of dental implants placed and rehabilitated by inexperienced post-graduate students at the one-year follow-up were high. No contributing factor was identified regarding implant failure. However, several factors significantly affected MBL: Diabetes, implant depth placement, PD, and width of KT.

Clinical implications: Survival and success rates of dental implants placed and rehabilitated by inexperienced post-graduate students were high at the one-year follow-up, similar to experienced practitioners. No contributing factors were identified regarding implant failure; however, several factors significantly affected MBL: Diabetes, implant depth placement, PD, and KM.

Keywords: dental implant; keratinized tissue; marginal bone loss.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Periapical radiographs with an intraoral dental film using a plastic index according to the parallel technique for marginal bone loss (MBL) analysis between baseline and 1 year follow-up.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Marginal bone loss measured on the mesial and distal sides and mean of both sides.
Figure 3
Figure 3
MBL vs. depth of implant placement.
Figure 4
Figure 4
MBL vs. measured keratinized tissue length.
Figure 5
Figure 5
MBL vs. measured pocket depth.
Figure 6
Figure 6
MBL vs. implant diameter.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Roccuzzo M., Bonino L., Dalmasso P., Aglietta M. Long-term results of a three arms prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients: 10 year data around sandblasted and acid etched surface. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:1105–1112. doi: 10.1111/clr.12227. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sicilia A., Quirynen M., Fontolliet A., Francisco H., Friedman A., Linkevicius T., Lutz R., Meijer H.J., Rompen E., Rotundo R., et al. Long-term stability of peri-implant tissues after bone or soft tissue augmentation. Effect of zirconia or titanium abutments on peri-implant soft tissues. Summary and consensus statements. The 4th EAO consensus conference. Clin. Oral Implants. 2015;26:148–152. doi: 10.1111/clr.12676. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Galindo-Moreno P., León-Cano A., Ortega-Oller I., Monje A., O′Valle F., Catena A. Marginal bone loss as success criterion in implant dentistry: Beyond 2 mm. Clin. Oral. 2015;26:28–34. doi: 10.1111/clr.12324. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin L., Hertzberg R., Har-Nes S., Schwartz-Arad D. Long-term marginal bone loss around single dental implants affected by current and past smoking habits. Implant Dent. 2008;17:422–429. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31818c4a24. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin L., Ofec R., Grossmann Y., Anner R. Periodontal disease as a risk for dental implant failure over time: A long-term historical cohort study. J. Clin. Peridontol. 2011;38:732–737. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01745.x. - DOI - PubMed