Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 5 19. Sep. 2017
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 5 (19.09.2017)
Page 1065-1073, doi:10.11607/jomi.5495, PubMed:28334057
Esthetic and Patient-Centered Outcomes of Single Implants: A Retrospective Study
Gjelvold, Björn / Chrcanovic, Bruno Ramos / Bagewitz, Ingrid Collin / Kisch, Jenö / Albrektsson, Tomas / Wennerberg, Ann
Purpose: The aims of this clinical study were to retrospectively evaluate implant survival, patient satisfaction, and radiographic, clinical, and esthetic outcomes following single-implant treatment.
Materials and Methods: Eighty-seven patients, with a total of 126 implants (XiVE S, Dentsply Implants), who received single implant-retained crowns between 2004 and 2011 were retrospectively evaluated. Implant survival, marginal bone levels (MBL), changes in implant/mesial tooth vertical relationship, pink esthetic score (PES), white esthetic score (WES), patient assessment of the esthetics (visual analog scale), and oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) were evaluated.
Results: Altogether, 59 patients with a total of 85 implants attended a final clinical and radiographic follow-up examination. The mean ages of males and females at implant placement were 19.78 and 22.58 years, respectively. The mean total follow-up time from the implant surgical date was 7.51 years. The 5-year implant clinical survival rate (CSR) was 98.4% (95% CI: 96.3%-100%), and crown CSR was 91.8% (95% CI: 86.3%-97.3%). The overall mean change in MBL was -0.19 mm. No significant differences were found between the different implant diameters (3.0, 3.4, and 3.8 mm) with regard to change in MBL. Mean increase in implant infraposition was 0.13 mm. With regard to esthetics, mean initial and final total PES were 9.61 and 11.49, respectively (P < .001). The mean WES was 6.48 at follow-up. Patients' mean assessment of soft tissue esthetics and implant-supported crown appearance were 73.5 and 82.1 (maximum score 100). At the follow-up examination, the additive OHIP-14 score was 16.11.
Conclusion: This retrospective study of XiVE S implants found excellent survival rates and showed good clinical outcomes concerning patient-centered findings, esthetics, and marginal bone preservation. In context, it is important to stress that this study consisted of mostly young patients with agenesis who were treated by experienced clinicians.
Keywords: agenesis, esthetics, infraposition, marginal bone level, patient satisfaction, patient-centered outcome, PES, pink esthetic score, single implant, WES, white esthetic score