İMPLANT DESTEKLİ PROTEZLER, KOMPLİKASYONLAR VE İMPLANT KAYIPLARI: 24 AYLIK KLİNİK SONUÇLAR

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 46 Sayı: 2, 40 - 46, 04.09.2012

Hakan Bilhan Hakan Bilhan Canan Bural Altuğ Çilingir Altuğ Çilingir Onur Geçkili Onur Geçkili

Öz

Amaç: Bu retrospektif çalışmada implant destekli sabit ve hareketli protezlerde protetik komplikasyonlar
ve implant kayıpları değerlendirilmiştir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada 89 hastaya 278 dental implant yerleştirilmiştir. Hareketli protez
dayanağı olarak 148 adet, sabit restorasyon dayanağı olarak 130 adet dental implant üzerine hazırlanan
implant destekli protezlerde yüklemeden itibaren 6., 12. ve 24. aydaki komplikasyonlar değerlendirilmiştir.
Verilerin istatistiksel değerlendirilmesinde Ki-Kare, Fisher's Exact Ki-Kare ve Mc Nemar
testleri kullanılmıştır (p < 0.05).
Bulgular: Dental implant kayıpları implantasyondan sonra ilk 6 ay içinde gerçekleşmiştir. İmp¬
lant kayıplarının %66'sı yükleme öncesinde, %34'ü ise yüklemeden sonra gerçekleşmiştir. Hareketli
protezlerde 6., 12. ve 24. ayda giderek artan komplikasyon oranları arasında anlamlı farklılıklar be¬
lirlenirken (p < 0.05); sabit protezlerde bu farklılıklar anlamlı değildir (p > 0.05). Genel olarak, 24 aylık
takip süresinde sabit protezlerde en sık vida gevşemesi görülürken; hareketli protezlerde ise astarlama
işlemi gereksinimine en sık rastlanmıştır.
Sonuç: İmplant destekli hareketli protezlerle tedavi planlamasında hastaların önceden aydınlatılması
ve tedavi tamamlandıktan sonra protezlerin rutin olarak kontrolü önem taşımaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İmplant komplikasyonları, vida gevşemesi, implant kaybı, protetik kompli­kasyonlar, tutuculuk kaybı

Kaynakça

• Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharas- saeng K, Kan JY. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses J Prosthet
• Johns RB, Jemt T, Heath M R Hutton JE, McKenna S, McNamara DC, et al. A mulı ticenter study of overdentures supported by Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1992; 7: 513-22.
• Allen PF, McMillan AS, Smith DC. Complications and maintenance requ­ irements of implant-supported prostheses
• Hemmings KW, Schmitt A, Zarb GA. Complications and maintenance requ­ irements for fixed prostheses and overden- tures in the edentulous mandible: a 5-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1994; 9: 191-96.
• Jemt T, Book K, Linden B, Urde G. Failures and complications in 92 consecu­ tively inserted overdentures supported by Branemark implants in severely resorbed treatment to first annual check-up. Int J Oral
• Smedberg JI, Lothigius F, Bodin I , gical two-year follow-up study of maxillary overdentures on osseointegrated implants. lant-retained mandibular overdentures: a Clin Oral Implants Res, 1993; 4: 39-46. 3-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants,
• Naert I , Quirynen M , Hooghe M , van Steenberghe D. A comparative prospective study of splinted and unsplinted Branemark implants in mandibular overdenture therapy: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Dent, 1994; 71: 486-92.
• Kiener P, Oetterli M , Mericske E, Mericske-Stern R. Effectiveness of maxillary overdentures supported by implants: main­ tenance and prosthetic complications. Int J Prosthodont, 2001; 14: 133-40.
• Wismeyer D, van Waas M A , Verı meeren JI. Overdentures supported by I T I Maxillofac Implants, 1994; 9: 627-35. implants: a 6.5-year evaluation of patient satisfaction and prosthetic aftercare. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1995; 10: 744-49.
• Mericske-Stern R. Clinical evaluati­ on of overdenture restorations supported by osseointegrated titanium implants: a retrosı pective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1990; 5: 375-83.
• Cooper LF, Scurria MS, Lang LA, Guckes AD, Moriarty JD, Felton DA. Tre­ atment of edentulism using Astra Tech imp­ lants and ball abutments to retain mandibular overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1999; 14: 646-53.
• Gotfredsen K, Holm B. Implant- supported mandibular overdentures retained lous patients. Clin Oral Implant Res, 1992; with ball or bar attachments: a randomized prospective 5-year study. Int J Prosthodont, 2000; 13: 125-30.
• Meijer HJ, Raghoebar G M , Van't Hof M A , Visser A, Geertman ME, Van Oort RP. A controlled clinical trial of implant-re­ tained mandibular overdentures; five-years' results of clinical aspects and aftercare of PJ, Krogh PH, Polizzi G, et al. Osseointeg­ IMZ implants and Branemark implants. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2000; 11: 441-47.
• Davis D M , Rogers JO, Packer ME. The extent of maintenance required by imp- 1996; 11: 767-74.
• Jemt T, Laney WR, Harris D, Henry PJ, Krogh PH Jr, Polizzi G, et al. Osseointeg­ rated implants for single tooth replacement: a 1-year report from a multicenter prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1991; 6: 29-36.
• Lekholm U , van Steenberghe D, Herrmann I , Bolender C, Folmer T, Gunne J, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the tre­ atment of partially edentulous jaws: a pros­ pective 5-year multicenter study. Int J Oral
• Jemt T, Pettersson P. A 3 -year follow- up study on single implant treatment. J Dent, 1993; 21:203-08.
• Naert I , Quirynen M , van Steenberg­ he D, Darius P. A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prost- heses. Part I I : Prosthetic aspects. J Prosthet Dent, 1992; 68: 949-56.
• Naert I , Quirynen M , Theuniers G, van Steenberghe D. Prosthetic aspects of osseointegrated fixtures supporting over- dentures. A 4-year report. J Prosthet Dent, 1991; 65: 671-80.
• Gunne J, Astrand P, Ahlen K, Borg K, Olsson M . Implants in partially edentuı
• Ekfeldt A, Carlsson GF, Borjesson G. Clinical evaluation of single-tooth restorati­ ons supported by osseointegrated implants: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1994; 9: 179-83.
• Laney WR, Jemt T, Harris D, Henry rated implants for single-tooth replacement: progress report from a multicenter prospec­ tive study after 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1994; 9: 49-54.
• Möllersten L, Lockowandt P, Linden LA. Comparison of strength and failure mode of seven implant systems: an in vitro test. J Prosthet Dent, 1997; 78(6): 582-91.
• Khraisat A, Stegaroiu R, Nomura S, Miyakawa O. Fatigue resistance of two implant/abutment joint designs. J Prosthet Dent, 2002; 88(6): 604-10.
• Haas R, Mensdorff-Pouilly N , Ma- ilath G, Watzek G. Survival of 1,920 IMZ implants followed for up to 100 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1996; 11(5): Dent, 2004; 91: 234-40. 581-88.
• Muftu A, Chapman RJ. Replacing posterior teeth with freestanding implants: four-year prosthodontic results of a prospec­ tive study. J Am Dent Assoc, 1998; 129(8): 1097-102.
• Stegaroiu R, Sato T, Kusakari H, M i ­ yakawa O. Influence of restoration type on stres distribution in bone around implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1998; 13(1): 82-90.
• Kunavisarut C, Lang L A , Stoner BR, Felton DA. Finite element analysis on dental implant-supported prostheses without passive fit. J Prosthodont, 2002; 11: 30-40.
• Adell R, Lekholm U , Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseo- integrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg, 1981; 10: 387-416.
• Lozada JL, Abbate MF, Pizzarello FA, James RA. Comparative three dimensio­ nal analysis of two finite-element endosseous implant designs. J Oral Implantol, 1994; 20: 315-21.
• Branemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 50: 399-410.
• Isidor, F. Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clin Oral Implants Res, 1996; 7: 143-152.
• Morgan MJ, James DF, Pilliar RM. Fractures of the fixture component of an os­ seointegrated implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1993; 8: 409-14.
• Yokoyama S, Wakabayashi N , Shi- ota M , Ohyama T. The influence of implant location and length on stress distribution for three-unit implant-supported posterior cantilever fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet
• Sertgöz A, Güvener S. Finite element analysis of the effect of cantilever and impı lant length on stress distribution in an impı lant-supported fixed prosthesis. J Prosthet
• Akca K , Iplikcioglu H . Finite ele­ ment stress analysis of the effect of short implant usage in place of cantilever extenı sions in mandibular posterior edentulism. J Oral Rehabil, 2002; 29: 350-56.
• Adell R, Lekholm U , Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseo- integrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg, 1981; 10: 387-416.