| 1. |
- Alissa, Rami, et al.
(författare)
-
Einfluss von Ibuprofen auf die Knochenheilung an Dentalimplantaten Eine randomisierte klinische Doppelblindstudie mit Plazebokontrolle : Effect of Ibuprofen of the bone cure in case of dental implants A random clinical double blind, placebo-controlled study
- 2010
-
Ingår i: IMPLANTOLOGIE. - 0943-9692. ; 18:1, s. 61-76
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Diese randomisierte plazebokontrollierte Doppelblindstudie wurde durchgeführt, um den Einfluss postoperativer Gaben von 600 mg Ibuprofen (eine Woche lang viermal täglich) auf das marginale Knochenniveau rund um Dentalimplantate zu untersuchen. Insgesamt wurden 61 Patienten entweder der Ibuprofen-Gruppe (n = 31) oder der Plazebo-Gruppe (n = 30) zugeordnet. Von 132 eingesetzten Implantaten entfielen 67 auf die Ibuprofen-Gruppe und 65 auf die Plazebo-Gruppe. Die Präparation der Implantatstollen erfolgte per intermittierender Bohrabfolge, angepasst an die Implantatdurchmesser und die lokale Knochenqualität entsprechend den Implantationsrichtlinien von Astra Tech. Untersucht wurden in erster Linie die Veränderungen des marginalen Knochenniveaus an den Dentalimplantaten vom Ausgangspunkt zwei Wochen nach der Implantation bis zu den Röntgenuntersuchungen nach drei und sechs Monaten. Die Zahnfilme wurden in Paralleltechnik unter Verwendung eines Filmhalters mit Strahlenleitvorrichtung aufgenommen. Mit Sichtbox und Handlupe (Vergrößerungsfaktor 8) wurde gemessen, wie stark sich das Knochenniveau veränderte. Zwei Patienten aus der Ibuprofen-Gruppe konnten die verordnete Anwendung des Medikaments wegen einer geringfügigen subjektiven Magenverstimmung nicht zu Ende führen. In der Kontrollgruppe erschien ein Patient zu keinem einzigen der vereinbarten Termine nach den Implantationen. Somit gab es insgesamt drei Studienabbrecher. Während der sechsmonatigen Beobachtungsdauer blieben alle Implantate in beiden Gruppen intakt. In der Ibuprofen-Gruppe reduzierten sich die Ausgangswerte beim Knochenniveau nach drei Monaten um durchschnittlich 0,33 mm und nach sechs Monaten um 0,29 mm. In der Plazebo-Gruppe waren diese Werte um 0,12 mm beziehungsweise 0,30 mm reduziert. Signifikante Gruppenunterschiede beim mittleren marginalen Knochenniveau zeigten sich weder nach drei (p = 0,27) noch nach sechs Monaten (p = 0,97). Es wurde geschlussfolgert, dass kurzfristige systemische Schmerzbehandlungen mit Ibuprofen in der frühen Einheilphase von Implantaten offenbar keinen signifikanten Einfluss auf den marginalen Knochen an Dentalimplantaten haben.
|
|
| 2. |
- Alissa, Rami, et al.
(författare)
-
The influence of platelet-rich plasma on the healing of extraction sockets: an explorative randomised clinical trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 121-134
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on the healing of hard and soft tissues of extraction sockets with a pilot study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing tooth extraction under intravenous sedation were asked to participate in the trial. Autologous platelet concentrates were prepared from the patients' blood and autologous thrombin was produced. Outcome measures were: pain level, analgesic consumption, oral function (ability to eat food, swallowing, mouth opening and speech), general activity, swelling, bruising, bleeding, bad taste or halitosis, food stagnation, patient satisfaction, healing complications, soft tissue healing, trabecular pattern of newly formed bone in extraction sockets, trabecular bone volume, trabecular separation, trabecular length, trabecular width, and trabecular number. Patients were followed up to 3 months post-extraction. RESULTS: Twelve patients (15 sockets) were randomly allocated to the PRP group and 11 patients (14 sockets) to the control group. Two patients from the control group did not attend any of the scheduled appointments following tooth extraction, and were considered dropouts. Additionally, one more patient from the control group and four patients from the PRP group did not attend their 3-month radiographic assessment appointments. Statistically significantly more pain was recorded in the control group for the first (P=0.02), second (P=0.02) and third (P=0.04) post-operative days for Visual Analogue Scale scores, whereas no differences were observed for the fourth (P=0.17), fifth (P=0.38), sixth (P=0.75) and seventh (P=0.75) post-operative days. There was a statistically significantly higher analgesic consumption for the first (P=0.03) and second (P=0.02) post-operative days in the control group and no differences thereafter. Differences in patients' responses in the health-related quality of life questionnaire were statistically significant in favour of PRP treatment only for the presence of bad taste or bad smell in the mouth (P=0.03), and food stagnation in the operation area (P=0.03). The difference between groups was not statistically significant for patient satisfaction with the treatment (P=0.31). Regarding complications, two dry sockets and one acutely inflamed alveolus occurred in patients of the control group, which determined a borderline statistically significant difference in favour of the PRP group (P=0.06). Soft tissue healing was significantly better in patients treated with PRP (P=0.03). Radiographic evaluation carried out by the two blinded examiners revealed a statistically significant difference (P=0.01) for sockets with dense homogeneous trabecular pattern, a borderline statistically significant difference in the trabecular pattern for bone volume (P=0.06) favouring PRP use, and no significant differences for trabecular separation (P=0.66), trabecular length (P=0.16), trabecular width (P=0.16) and trabecular number (P=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: PRP may have some benefits in reducing complications such as alveolar osteitis and improving healing of soft tissue of extraction sockets. There were insufficient data to support the use of PRP to promote bone healing or to enhance the quality of life of patients following tooth extraction, although the sample size was too small to detect statistically significant differences.
|
|
| 3. |
- Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al.
(författare)
-
Immediate occlusal versus non-occlusal loading of single zirconia implants. A multicentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial.
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 111-20
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To evaluate whether immediate non-occlusal loading of single zirconia implants could reduce early failures when compared to immediate occlusal loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty partially edentulous patients who received one single zirconia implant (Z-Systems) at least 10 mm long and 3.25 mm wide inserted with a torque of at least 35 Ncm were randomised to immediate occlusal or non-occlusal loading groups. All patients received provisional acrylic crowns the same day of implant placement. Provisional crowns were replaced after 4 to 5 months by definitive full ceramic crowns. Outcome measures were implant success, any complications and peri-implant marginal bone levels. RESULTS: One year after loading, no patients had dropped out. Five implants (12.5%) failed early: three occlusally loaded and two non-occlusally loaded. Three complications occurred, all after delivery of the definitive crowns: one crown fractured (occlusal loading), one had to be remade after debridement because of hyperplastic tissues (occlusal loading), and one crown decemented (nonocclusal loading). These differences were not statistically significant. Both groups gradually lost periimplant bone in a highly statistically significant way. One year after loading, patients subjected to non-occlusal loading lost an average of 0.7 mm of peri-implant bone versus 0.9 mm in the occlusal group. This difference in bone loss between groups was not statistically significant. There was an association between immediate post-extractive implants and implant failures (P=0.01). Four of the 10 immediate post-extractive implants (40%) failed versus one out of 30 delayed implants (3%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not provide a conclusive answer to whether immediate non-occlusal loading may decrease implant failures. Immediately loaded zirconia implants placed in post-extractive sites had high failure rates.
|
|
| 4. |
- Capelli, Matteo, et al.
(författare)
-
A 5-year report from a multicentre randomised clinical trial: immediate non-occlusal versus early loading of dental implants in partially edentulous patients
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:3, s. 209-219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To compare peri-implant bone and soft-tissue levels of immediately non-occlusally loaded versus non-submerged early loaded implants in partially edentulous patients 5 years after implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients were randomised in five Italian private practices: 25 in the immediately loaded group and 27 in the early loaded group. To be immediately loaded, single implants had to be inserted with a torque of > 30 Ncm, and splinted implants with a torque of > 20 Ncm. Immediately loaded implants were provided with non-occluding temporary restorations within 48 hours. After 2 months, the provisional restorations were put in full occlusion. Implants were early loaded after 2 months. Final restorations were provided 8 months after implant placement. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures as well as biological and prosthetic complications recorded by non-blinded assessors. Blinded assessors evaluated peri-implant bone and soft-tissue levels. RESULTS: Fifty-two implants were immediately loaded and 52 early loaded. One patient of the early loaded group dropped out after the 1-year recall. One single immediately loaded implant failed 2 months after placement. Only one complication (iatrogenic peri-implantitis) occurred in one patient of the early loading group. Both groups gradually lost peri-implant bone in a highly statistically significant way at 2, 8 and 14 months and at 4 and 5 years. After 5 years, patients of both groups had lost an average of 1.2 mm of peri-implant marginal bone. There were no statistically significant differences in peri-implant bone and soft-tissue level changes between the 2 groups. At 5 years, there was a statistically significant recession (0.2 mm) of the vestibular soft tissues from baseline (delivery of the final restorations 8 months after implant placement) only for immediately loaded implants. CONCLUSIONS: In well maintained patients, complications are uncommon and healthy and stable periimplant tissues can be maintained for 5 years around immediately and early loaded implants.
|
|
| 5. |
- Checchi, Luigi, et al.
(författare)
-
Crestal sinus lift for implant rehabilitation: a randomised clinical trial comparing the Cosci and the Summers techniques. A preliminary report on complications and patient preference
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:3, s. 221-232
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of two different techniques to lift the maxillary sinus via a crestal approach: the Summers versus the Cosci technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen partially edentulous patients missing bilaterally maxillary molars and/ or premolars having 4 to 7 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5 mm thickness below the maxillary sinuses measured on computed tomography scans were randomised to have implants placed in sinuses crestally lifted according to the Cosci or Summers technique with bone substitutes according to a split-mouth design. Implants were left to heal submerged for 6 months. Implants were loaded with acrylic provisional crowns/prostheses. Screw-retained definitive metal-ceramic prostheses were delivered 4 months after provisional loading. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, operation time, operator preference, and patient preference assessed 1 month after surgery and 1 month after delivery of the final prostheses by a blinded outcome assessor. All patients were followed up to 5 months after loading (1 year after implant placement). RESULTS: Nineteen study implants were placed according to each technique. No patient dropped out and no implant failed. No discomfort/complications occurred at sites treated with the Cosci technique whereas 12 patients reported discomfort during the augmentation procedure at the side treated with the Summers technique, this was statistically significant, and in one of these patients a perforation of the sinus membrane occurred. Postoperatively, headache was reported by nine patients and swelling occurred in three of these patients at the Summers treated sides. Statistically significantly less time was required to place implants according to the Cosci technique (33 versus 24 minutes, on average). The two operators and 14 out of 15 patients preferred the Cosci technique. CONCLUSIONS: Both crestal sinus lift techniques were successful but the Cosci technique required less surgical time, produced less intra- and postoperative morbidity and was preferred by patients.
|
|
| 6. |
- Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Does antibiotic prophylaxis at implant placement decrease early implant failures? A Cochrane systematic review.
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 101-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Marco Esposito is the first author of two of the included studies; however, he was not involved in the quality assessment of these trials. This review is based on a Cochrane systematic review entitled 'Interventions for replacing missing teeth: antibiotics at dental implant placement to prevent complications' published in The Cochrane Library (see http://www.cochrane.org for more information). Cochrane systematic reviews are regularly updated to include new research, and in response to comments and criticisms from readers. If you wish to comment on this review, please send your comments to the Cochrane website or to Marco Esposito. The Cochrane Library should be consulted for the most recent version of the review. The results of a Cochrane Review can be interpreted differently, depending on people's perspectives and circumstances. Please consider the conclusions presented carefully. They are the opinions of the review authors, and are not necessarily shared by the Cochrane Collaboration.To assess the beneficial or harmful effects of systemic prophylactic antibiotics at dental implant placement versus no antibiotic/placebo administration and, if antibiotics are of benefit, to find which type, dosage and duration is the most effective.The Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to 2 June 2010 for randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) with a follow-up of at least 3 months comparing the administration of various prophylactic antibiotic regimens versus no antibiotics to patients undergoing dental implant placement. Outcome measures were prosthesis failures, implant failures, postoperative infections and adverse events (gastrointestinal, hypersensitivity, etc.). Screening of eligible studies, assessment of the methodological quality of the trials and data extraction were conducted in duplicate and independently by two review authors. Meta-analyses were conducted.Four RCTs were identified: three comparing 2 g of preoperative amoxicillin versus placebo (927 patients) and the other comparing 1 g of preoperative amoxicillin plus 500 mg four times a day for 2 days versus no antibiotics (80 patients). The meta-analyses of the four trials showed a statistically significantly higher number of patients experiencing implant failures in the group not receiving antibiotics: risk ratio=0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.84). The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one patient having an implant failure is 33 (95% CI 17-100), based on a patient implant failure rate of 5% in patients not receiving antibiotics. The other outcomes were not statistically significant, and only two minor adverse events were recorded, one in the placebo group.There is some evidence suggesting that 2 g of amoxicillin given orally 1 h preoperatively significantly reduce failures of dental implants placed in ordinary conditions. No significant adverse events were reported. It might be sensible to suggest the use of a single dose of 2 g prophylactic amoxicillin prior to dental implant placement. It is still unknown whether post-operative antibiotics are beneficial, and which is the most effective antibiotic.
|
|
| 7. |
- Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics at placement of dental implants: a pragmatic multicentre placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 135-143
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics for dental implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirteen dentists working in private practices agreed to participate in this trial, each centre providing 50 patients. One hour prior to implant placement, patients were randomised to take orally 2 g amoxicillin or identical placebo tablets. Patients needing bone augmentation at implant placement were not included. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, adverse events and post-operative complications. Patients were seen 1 week, 2 weeks and 4 months post-operatively. RESULTS: Two centres did not deliver any data, two centres did not manage to include the agreed quota of patients and three patients had to be excluded. Two-hundred and fifty-two patients were evaluated in the antibiotic group and 254 in the placebo group, and none dropped out at 4 months. Four prostheses and seven implants (in five patients) failed in the antibiotics group versus 10 prostheses and 13 implants (in 12 patients) in the placebo group. Eleven complications were reported in the antibiotic group versus 13 (in 12 patients) in the placebo group. No side effects were reported. There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis failures, implant losses and complications. Patients receiving immediate post-extractive implants had an increased failure risk compared with patients receiving delayed implants (9% versus 2%). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were observed, although trends clearly favoured the antibiotic group. Immediate post-extractive implants were more likely to fail.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
