Osseointegrated Dental Implants

Osseointegration implies a firm, direct and lasting connection between vital bone and screw-shaped titanium implants of defined finish and geometry-fixtures. Thus, there is no interposed tissue between fixture and bone. Osseointegration can only be achieved and maintained by a gentle surgical installation technique, a long healing time and a proper stress distribution when in function. During a 15-year period (1965-1980), 2768 fixtures were installed in 410 edentulous jaws of 371 consecutive patients. All patients were provided with facultatively removable bridges and were examined at continuous yearly controls. The surgical and prosthetic technique was developed and evaluated over a pilot period of 5 years. The results of standardized procedures applied on a consecutive clinical material with an observation time of 5-9 years were thought to properly reflect the potential of the method. In this group, 130 jaws were provided with 895 fixtures, and of these 81% of the maxillary and 91% of the mandibular fixtures remained stable, supporting bridges. In 89% of the maxillary and 100% of the mandibular cases, the bridges were continuously stable. During healing and the first year after connection of the bridge, the mean value for marginal bone loss was 1.5 mm. Thereafter only 0.1 mm was lost annually. The clinical results achieved with bridges on osseointegrated fixtures fulfill and exceed the demands set by the 1978 Harvard Conference on successful dental implantation procedures.

In the present multi-center study, non-submerged ITI implants were prospectively followed to evaluate their long-term prognosis in fully and partially edentulous patients. In a total of 1003 patients, 2359 implants were consecutively inserted. Following a healing period of 3-6 months, the successfully integrated implants were restored with 393 removable and 758 fixed restorations. Subsequently, all consecutive implants were documented annually up to 8 years. At each examination, the clinical status of all implants was evaluated according to predefined criteria of success. Therefore, the data base allowed the evaluation of 8-year cumulative survival and success rates for 2359 implants. In addition, cumulative success rates were calculated for implant subgroups divided per implant type, implant length, and implant location. Furthermore, the actual 5-year survival and success rates could be determined for 488 implants. During the healing period, 13 implants did not successfully integrate, whereas 2346 implants fulfilled the predefined criteria of success. This corresponds with an early failure rate of 0.55%. During follow-up, 19 implants were classified as failures due to several reasons. In addition, 17 implants (approximately 0.8%) demonstrated at the last annual examination a suppurative periimplant infection. Including 127 drop out implants (= 5.4% drop out rate) into the calculation, the 8-year cumulative survival and success rates resulted in 96.7% and 93.3%, respectively. The analysis of implant subgroups showed slightly more favorable cumulative success rates for screw type implants (> 95%) compared to hollow-cylinder implants (91.3%), and clearly better success rates for mandibular implants (approximately 95%) when compared to maxillary implants (approximately 87%). The actual 5-year survival and success rates of 488 implants with 98.2% and 97.3%, respectively, were slightly better than the estimated 5-year cumulative survival and success rates of 2359 implants indicating that the applied life table analysis is a reliable statistical method to evaluate the long-term prognosis of dental implants. It can be concluded that non-submerged ITI implants maintain success rates well above 90% in different clinical centers for observation periods up to 8 years.