Tag Archives: Prosthesis Survival

A Retrospective Analysis of 800 Brånemark System Implants Following the All-on-Four™ Protocol

Thomas J. Balshi, DDS, PhD, FACP, Glenn J. Wolfinger, DMD, FACP,  Robert W. Slauch, BS, & Stephen F. Balshi, MBE

J Prosthodont. The American College of Prosthodontists J Prosthodont. 23 (2014) 83–88.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate implant survival rates in patients treated with the All-on-Four™ protocol according to edentulous jaws, gender, and implant orientation (tilted vs. axial). Materials and Methods: All Brånemark System implants placed in patients following the All-on-Four™ protocol in a single private practice were separated into multiple classifications (maxilla vs. mandible; male vs. female; tilted vs. axial) by retrospective patient chart review. Inclusion criteria consisted of any Brånemark System implant placed with the All-on-Four™  protocol from the clinical inception (May 2005) until December 2011. Life tables were constructed to determine cumulative implant survival rates (CSR). The arches, genders, and implant orientations were statistically compared with ANOVA.

Results: One hundred fifty-two patients, comprising 200 arches (800 implants) from May 2005 until December 2011, were included in the study. Overall implant CSR was 97.3% (778 of 800). Two hundred eighty-nine of 300 maxillary implants and 489 of 500 mandibular implants survived, for CSRs of 96.3% and 97.8%, respectively. In male patients, 251 of 256 implants (98.1%) remain in function while 527 of 544 implants (96.9%) in female patients survived. Regarding implant orientation, 389 of 400 tilted implants and 389 of 400 axial implants osseointegrated, for identical CSRs of 97.3%. All comparisons were found to be statistically insignificant. The prosthesis survival rate was 99.0%.

Conclusions: The results from this study suggest that edentulous jaws, gender, and implant orientation are not significant parameters when formulating an All-on-Four™ treatment plan. The high CSRs for each variable analyzed demonstrate the All-on- Four™ treatment as a viable alternative to more extensive protocols for rehabilitating the edentulous maxilla or mandible.

Article in PDF

 

A Retrospective Analysis of 110 Zygomatic Implants in a Single-Stage Immediate Loading Protocol

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.Vol 24, No. 2, 335-341, 2009.

Balshi SF, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi TJ
Institute for Facial Esthetics, Prosthodontics Intermedica, Fort Washington, Pennsylvania, USA.

This clinical study using a specific technique was carried out to determine the clinical effectiveness of zygomatic implants under an immediate loading protocol. All patients treated between May 2000 and October 2006 who received zygomatic implants were included in this retrospective analysis. All patients were treated using the same surgical and restorative protocol. The following data were recorded: gender, age, type of implant, number of implants placed, dimensions of implants, and implant and prosthesis survival. Fifty-six consecutive patients (29 women, 27 men; mean age of 60.58 years [range, 38.78 to 84.01]) were treated. All were in need of oral reconstruction and had maxillary atrophy that warranted zygomatic implant placement. One hundred ten zygomatic implants were placed in these 56 patients. Four of the 110 zygomatic implants failed, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 96.37% with follow-up data no less than 9 months and in excess of 5 years. All four failures were turned-surface zygomatic implants. There have been no failures to date with the titanium anodized-surface zygomatic implants. The prosthesis survival rate was 100.0%. In this retrospective analysis of 56 patients receiving 110 zygomatic implants, the survival rate of zygomatic implants was in excess of 96% over a period of 9 months to 5 years. This technique resulted in a stable and predictable prosthetic reconstruction.

Article in PDF