Journal of Dental Implants
   About JDI | Editorial | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Login 
Users Online: 362  Wide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 3-8

Success of Brånemark system dental implants and implant-supported prostheses: A 1 year retrospective clinical and radiological study of 232 implants of 60 patients

1 Department of Oral Diagnosis, School of Dentistry of Paulista University, Brasília, DF, Brazil
2 Department of Oral Rehabilitation, School of Dentistry of Brazilian Association of Dentistry, Goiânia, Brazil
3 Department of Oral Rehabilitation, School of Dentistry of Federal University of Goias, Goiás, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Claudio M Pereira
Department of Oral Diagnosis, Coordenação de Odontologia, Institute of Sciences of the Health, Dentistry, UNIP, SGAS Quadra 913, Conjunto B, Asa Sul
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0974-6781.111659

Rights and Permissions

Background: The successful replacement of missing tooth by titanium implants duly integrated into the tissues is a major breakthrough in Dentistry. From the moment that implant systems with rigorous scientific methodology were introduced, eliminating the pre-existent empiricism, long-term studies of effectiveness have been presented. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the success rates of osseointegrated implants and implant-supported prostheses performed by students of implant dentistry at the Brazilian Dental Association - Goiás Section - between 2006 and 2007. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients who received 232 implants were evaluated. These patients were followed up by clinical and radiographic examination to evaluate the survival rate of implants and prostheses. Also, the patients answered a questionnaire regarding their satisfaction with the treatment. Results: Clinical signs and radiographic findings showed the following: No implant had mobility, one patient reported pain in the region of one implant, eight implants had exposure of the head, one patient complained of paresthesia mandibular, five implants had exudate, one implant had exposure of the threads, and no implant showed radiolucency in radiographic image. 57.9% of patients who answered the questionnaire considered the treatment "excellent." The complications of prostheses showed the occurrence of fracture of porcelain in two prostheses, fracture of the resin in one prosthesis, loosening of one screw implant, abutment misfit in three prostheses, two abutments released from the crown, and and there was oral exposure of the abutments teeth in 2 prostheses. Of the 232 implants evaluated in 60 patients, 4 implants were lost and removed, corresponding to a survival rate of 98.28%. Conclusions: The use of Brånemark system implants seems to be a successful alternative in the treatment of various types of edentulism.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded542    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal