Aim: The rising average age increases edentulous cases, demanding more implant–prosthetic rehabilitation, with cardiovascular diseases being significant factors. This study compared healthy patients (CG = Control Group) and those with cardiovascular disease (TG = Test Group) for implant survival, Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), peri-implant tissue level parameters as Periodontal Screening and Recording (PSR), Plaque Index (PI), Bleeding on Probing (BoP) Peri-implant Probing Depth (PPD), and surgical complications. Smoking impact on both groups and medication influence in the TG were secondary outcomes. Patients underwent full-arch implant prosthetic rehabilitation. Methods: Implant survival rate, MBL, and surgical complications were recorded during the monitoring period (7 years), while peri-implant parameters were assessed at the end of the observational time. A total of 26 and 28 CG and TG patients were recruited, respectively. Results: A total of 128 implants were placed in CG, while 142 in the TG. Implant survival and MBL showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, peri-implant parameters were more unfavorable in TG. The only significant surgical complication was higher bleeding rates in the TG (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Cardiovascular patients showed similar implant survival and MBL but had adverse peri-implant parameters and increased bleeding rates. Higher smoking levels may relate to unfavorable implant outcomes. Further investigation is needed on drug impact with larger samples.

Full Arch Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation in Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: A 7-Year Follow-Up Prospective Single Cohort Study / D'Orto, B.; Tete, G.; Nagni, M.; Visconti, R. F.; Polizzi, E.; Gherlone, E. F.. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 2077-0383. - 13:4(2024). [10.3390/jcm13040924]

Full Arch Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation in Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: A 7-Year Follow-Up Prospective Single Cohort Study

D'Orto B.
Primo
;
Nagni M.;Gherlone E. F.
Ultimo
2024-01-01

Abstract

Aim: The rising average age increases edentulous cases, demanding more implant–prosthetic rehabilitation, with cardiovascular diseases being significant factors. This study compared healthy patients (CG = Control Group) and those with cardiovascular disease (TG = Test Group) for implant survival, Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), peri-implant tissue level parameters as Periodontal Screening and Recording (PSR), Plaque Index (PI), Bleeding on Probing (BoP) Peri-implant Probing Depth (PPD), and surgical complications. Smoking impact on both groups and medication influence in the TG were secondary outcomes. Patients underwent full-arch implant prosthetic rehabilitation. Methods: Implant survival rate, MBL, and surgical complications were recorded during the monitoring period (7 years), while peri-implant parameters were assessed at the end of the observational time. A total of 26 and 28 CG and TG patients were recruited, respectively. Results: A total of 128 implants were placed in CG, while 142 in the TG. Implant survival and MBL showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, peri-implant parameters were more unfavorable in TG. The only significant surgical complication was higher bleeding rates in the TG (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Cardiovascular patients showed similar implant survival and MBL but had adverse peri-implant parameters and increased bleeding rates. Higher smoking levels may relate to unfavorable implant outcomes. Further investigation is needed on drug impact with larger samples.
2024
cardiovascular disease
dental implants
dental prothesis
implant supported
systemic diseases
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
jcm-13-00924.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: PDF editoriale (versione pubblicata dall'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.35 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.35 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/195945
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact