Survival and Success

Complications related to dental implants have been reported to be as high as 33.6%. The most commonly encountered issues include veneer fractures (13.5%), peri-implantitis and soft tissue problems (8.5%), loss of access hole restoration (5.4%), screw or abutment loosening (5.3%), and loss of retention of cemented restorations (4.7%) (Jung et al., 2012; Pjetursson et al., 2012; Romeo & Storelli, 2012; Scheuber et al., 2012).

Recent studies indicate a reduction in aesthetic complications, likely due to advancements in implant and prosthetic design. However, biological complications, such as peri-implantitis, have remained consistent compared to older studies. Despite improvements in implant technology, the incidence of mechanical complications, particularly the fracture of veneering materials, has increased (Pjetursson et al., 2014).

 

Implant Survival

Advances in implant dentistry have led to an increase in the overall 5-year survival rate of implant-supported prostheses, with recent studies reporting a survival rate of 97.1%, up from 93.5% in earlier studies (Pjetursson et al., 2014).

 

Implant‐Retained Single Crowns

According to a meta-analysis by Jung et al. (2012), the survival rate for implants supporting single crowns was 97.2% at 5 years and 95.2% at 10 years. For the single crown restorations themselves, survival rates were reported at 96.3% at 5 years and 89.4% at 10 years. Another review found a 10-year implant survival rate of 93.8% at the patient level and 95.0% at the implant level, with the corresponding crown survival rate being 89.5% (Hjalmarsson et al., 2016).

 

Implant‐Retained Bridge

A meta-analysis by Pjetursson et al. (2012) reported that the survival rate for implants supporting fixed dental prostheses was 95.6% after 5 years and 93.1% after 10 years. When only rough surface implants were analysed (excluding machined surface implants), the survival rate increased to 97.2% after 5 years.

 

The survival rate for implant-supported fixed prostheses was 95.4% after 5 years and 80.1% after 10 years. Notably, when only metal-ceramic restorations were included in the analysis, the survival rate increased to 96.4% after 5 years and 93.9% after 10 years.

 

Immediate Implants success and survival

Implant survival can be influenced by the timing of placement relative to tooth extraction. The failure rate for implants placed in fresh extraction sockets is reported at 4%, compared to a 3.09% failure rate for implants placed in healed sites (Chrcanovic et al., 2015b). Immediate placement of implants into infected sites may slightly increase the risk of failure compared to placement into non-infected sites.

 

However, this risk can be minimised through meticulous cleaning, socket curettage, debridement, and the use of a chlorhexidine 0.12% rinse prior to implant placement (Chrcanovic et al., 2015e; Zhao et al., 2016).

 

Full Arch Implants success and survival

Mandibular overdentures supported by implants demonstrate high survival rates, ranging from 93% to 100%, regardless of the attachment system used (Kim et al., 2012). Common prosthetic maintenance issues include the replacement of components such as magnets, and the activation of matrices or clips for ball or bar attachments. Other complications include fractures of the attachment system or denture components and the need for prosthesis-related adjustments (Andreiotelli et al., 2010; Goodacre et al., 2003; Kim et al., 2012).

 

 

We would like to acknowledge Dr. Manraj Kalsi for his insights and contributions to this page