Andersson Peter, Pagliani Luca, Verrocchi Damiano, Volpe Stefano, Sahlin Herman, Sennerby Lars
Private Practice, Clinica Feltre, Viale 14 Agosto 1866, No. 31, 32032 Feltre, Italy.
Private Practice, Via Giuseppe Mercalli 11, Milano, Italy.
Int J Dent. 2019 Apr 1;2019:3209872. doi: 10.1155/2019/3209872. eCollection 2019.
Diagnostic instruments based on resonance frequency analysis (RFA) can be utilised to assess dental implant stability during treatment and follow-up.
The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of patient- and implant-related factors on implant stability and the 5-year implant survival. In addition, the influence of stability (ISQ value) at placement and abutment connection on implant survival was evaluated.
RFA measurements from a total of 334 consecutive patients with 745 dental implants (Neoss Ltd., Harrogate, UK) were retrospectively analysed after at least 5 years in function. Statistics were used to evaluate the influence of the different variables on implant stability and implant survival. Odds ratio calculations were performed to compare the risk for implant failure using 60, 65, 70, and 75 ISQ as threshold levels at placement and loading.
A total of 20 implant failures in 14 patients were noted during the 5 years of follow-up, giving an overall cumulative survival rate (CSR) of 97.3% at the implant level and 95.8% at the patient level. Gender, jaw, position, bone quality, and implant diameter had an influence on implant stability at placement. Jaw, bone quality, and implant diameter had an influence on stability after 3-4 months of healing. More failures were observed in full than in partial rehabilitations. Age, gender, jaw, position, bone quantity, bone quality, implant diameter, and implant length had no influence on implant survival. Implants with ISQ values below the threshold levels showed lower survival rates compared to implants with values above these levels.
The present study showed a significantly higher risk for implant failure, showing an ISQ value below 70 and 75 at placement or after 3-4 months of healing. The results indicate that RFA measurements can be used to identify implants with increased risk for failure.
基于共振频率分析（RFA）的诊断仪器可用于在治疗和随访期间评估牙种植体的稳定性。
本研究的目的是调查患者和种植体相关因素对种植体稳定性和5年种植体存留率的影响。此外，还评估了种植体植入时和基台连接时的稳定性（ISQ值）对种植体存留率的影响。
对总共334例连续患者的745颗牙种植体（英国哈罗盖特的Neoss有限公司）进行RFA测量，在其功能至少5年后进行回顾性分析。采用统计学方法评估不同变量对种植体稳定性和种植体存留率的影响。进行比值比计算，以比较在植入和加载时使用60、65、70和75 ISQ作为阈值水平时种植体失败的风险。
在5年的随访期间，共记录到14例患者的20颗种植体失败，种植体水平的总体累积存留率（CSR）为97.3%，患者水平为95.8%。性别、颌骨、位置、骨质量和种植体直径对植入时的种植体稳定性有影响。颌骨、骨质量和种植体直径对愈合3 - 4个月后的稳定性有影响。全口修复比部分修复观察到更多的失败病例。年龄、性别、颌骨、位置、骨量、骨质量、种植体直径和种植体长度对种植体存留率没有影响。与ISQ值高于阈值水平的种植体相比，ISQ值低于阈值水平的种植体显示出较低的存留率。
本研究表明，种植体植入时或愈合3 - 4个月后ISQ值低于70和75时，种植体失败的风险显著更高。结果表明，RFA测量可用于识别失败风险增加的种植体。
