Design: This retrospective cohort study aimed to investigate the risk and variables of tooth loss for teeth adjacent to dental implants compared to teeth nonadjacent to implants. The study followed the STROBE guidelines and was approved by the Institutional Review Board.

Cohort Selection: The study included patients treated with dental implants at UCSF School of Dentistry between 2000 and 2020. The inclusion criteria for teeth adjacent to implants required the implant to support a fixed prosthesis and a follow-up period of at least 12 months. Nonadjacent teeth also required a follow-up period of at least 12 months. Teeth were excluded if they had a hopeless prognosis or were planned for extraction before the completion of restorative treatment.

Data Analysis: Data were extracted from electronic health records, including patient demographics, dental histories, and outcomes for teeth adjacent and nonadjacent to implants. Statistical analyses, including Kaplan-Meier survival plots, log-rank tests, and multivariate logistic regression, were used to compare tooth survival and identify aetiologies of tooth loss.

Results: The study included 787 patients, with 2048 teeth adjacent and 15,637 teeth nonadjacent to implants. The 10-year cumulative survival rate was 89.2% for teeth adjacent to implants and 99.3% for nonadjacent teeth. Teeth adjacent to implants had a significantly higher risk of tooth loss (Odds Ratio [OR] 13.15). The primary etiology of tooth loss adjacent to implants was root fracture (45.2%), followed by caries (28.9%), periodontitis (24.1%), and endodontic failure (1.8%). For nonadjacent teeth, periodontitis was the leading cause of tooth loss (51.9%).

Conclusions: The study found that teeth adjacent to dental implants had a significantly higher risk of tooth loss, primarily due to root fractures. The findings suggest that dental implants may act as an iatrogenic factor, increasing the risk of complications for adjacent teeth. Conservative management of natural dentition should be prioritized, with emphasis on stringent periodontal surveillance and effective home care. Future research should focus on prospective studies to further explore these associations and improve clinical outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11436352PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41432-024-01052-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

teeth adjacent
28
tooth loss
24
dental implants
20
adjacent implants
16
teeth
14
nonadjacent implants
12
nonadjacent teeth
12
implants
11
adjacent
10
tooth
8

Similar Publications

Introduction: Guided surgery for immediate anterior implants aims to reduce the time required for aesthetic and functional immediate loading. However, the limited surface area of anterior teeth for guide stabilization may affect the accuracy of implant positioning. This in vitro study evaluated the effect of the number of supporting teeth on the accuracy of immediate implants in the maxillary central incisor region.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Unlabelled: Peri-implantitis (PI) is an inflammatory disease that affects supportive tissues around dental implants, and its progression eventually leads to bone loss and implant failure. However, PI effects may be different based on the presence or absence of adjacent teeth.

Objective: To investigate the differences in bone loss and inflammation between implants placed adjacent to a tooth or edentulous area in a ligature-induced PI model.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Extensive and closely coordinated remodeling processes take place in the periodontal ligament (PDL) and the adjacent bone during orthodontic tooth movement. In complex orthodontic cases, it is necessary to move teeth into an augmented bony defect, for example, in patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and palate. The important role of the PDL during tooth movement is well accepted but not fully understood.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Congenital missing teeth are among the most prevalent dental malformations. Maxillary lateral incisors are particularly prone to agenesis, often missing bilaterally. This condition presented complex challenges for both patients and clinicians.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Factors influencing submandibular fossa visibility on panoramic images: a comparative CBCT study.

BMC Oral Health

December 2024

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Türkiye.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the variables affecting the visibility of the submandibular fossa (SF) on panoramic images, including SF depth and types, age, gender, presence or absence of tooth, location of mandibular canal, and alveolar bone thicknesses.

Methods: Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and conventional panoramic images of 150 patients were analyzed retrospectively. The visibility of the SF on panoramic images was compared with its depth and adjacent alveolar bone thicknesses on CBCT.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!