Radiographic bone level changes of implant-supported restorations in edentulous and partially dentate patients: 5-year results.

PURPOSE To evaluate and compare crestal bone level changes and peri-implant status of implant-supported reconstructions in edentulous and partially dentate patients after a minimum of 5 years of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS All patients who received a self-tapping implant with a microstructured surface during the years 2003 and 2004 at the Department of Prosthodontics, University of Bern, were included in this study. The implant restorations comprised fixed and removable prostheses for partially and completely edentulous patients. Radiographs were taken immediately after surgery, at impression making, and 1 and 5 years after loading. Crestal bone level (BIC) was measured from the implant shoulder to the first bone contact, and changes were calculated over time (ΔBIC). The associations between pocket depth, bleeding on probing (BOP), and ΔBIC were assessed. RESULTS Sixty-one implants were placed in 20 patients (mean age, 62 ± 7 years). At the 5-year follow-up, 19 patients with 58 implants were available. Implant survival was 98.4% (one early failure; one patient died). The average ΔBIC between surgery and 5-year follow-up was 1.5 ± 0.9 mm and 1.1 ± 0.6 mm for edentulous and partially dentate patients, respectively. Most bone resorption (50%, 0.7 mm) occurred during the first 3 months (osseointegration) and within the first year of loading (21%, 0.3 mm). Mean annual bone loss during the 5 years of loading was < 0.12 mm. Mean pocket depth was 2.6 ± 0.7 mm. Seventeen percent of the implant sites displayed BOP; the frequency was significantly higher in women. None of the variables were significantly associated with crestal bone loss. CONCLUSION Crestal bone loss after 5 years was within the normal range, without a significant difference between edentulous and partially dentate patients. In the short term, this implant system can be used successfully for various prosthetic indications.

Mitral valve replacement in patients under 65 years of age: mechanical or biological valves?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW There is controversy regarding the optimal choice of prosthetic valves in patients less than 65 years of age requiring mitral valve replacement (MVR). Recently, trends for valve replacement are moving towards biological prosthesis also in younger patients, which is justified by the fact that a later valve-in-valve procedure is feasible in the case of degeneration of the tissue valve. This strategy is increasingly recommended in aortic valve surgery but is questionable for MVR. The purpose of this review is to evaluate current guidelines and analyse evidence for biological MVR in patients under 65 years. RECENT FINDINGS There are differences between guidelines of the American Heart Association and those of the European Society of Cardiology concerning the choice of prostheses in patients undergoing MVR. Although the European Society of Cardiology recommends a mechanical mitral valve in patients under 65 years of age, the American Heart Association does not provide detailed advice for these patients. Mitral valve replacement with biological valves in patients under 65 years is associated with higher rates of reoperation due to structural valve deterioration. In addition, several studies showed a decreased survival after biological MVR. SUMMARY Evidence for biological MVR in patients less than 65 years without comorbidities or contraindication for oral anticoagulation does not exist. Recommendations for patients less than 65 years of age should not be blurred by current 'en-vogue' methods for promising but not yet proven valve-in-valve strategies.

Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this prospective cohort trial was to perform a cost/time analysis for implant-supported single-unit reconstructions in the digital workflow compared to the conventional pathway. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 20 patients were included for rehabilitation with 2 × 20 implant crowns in a crossover study design and treated consecutively each with customized titanium abutments plus CAD/CAM-zirconia-suprastructures (test: digital) and with standardized titanium abutments plus PFM-crowns (control conventional). Starting with prosthetic treatment, analysis was estimated for clinical and laboratory work steps including measure of costs in Swiss Francs (CHF), productivity rates and cost minimization for first-line therapy. Statistical calculations were performed with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS Both protocols worked successfully for all test and control reconstructions. Direct treatment costs were significantly lower for the digital workflow 1815.35 CHF compared to the conventional pathway 2119.65 CHF [P = 0.0004]. For subprocess evaluation, total laboratory costs were calculated as 941.95 CHF for the test group and 1245.65 CHF for the control group, respectively [P = 0.003]. The clinical dental productivity rate amounted to 29.64 CHF/min (digital) and 24.37 CHF/min (conventional) [P = 0.002]. Overall, cost minimization analysis exhibited an 18% cost reduction within the digital process. CONCLUSION The digital workflow was more efficient than the established conventional pathway for implant-supported crowns in this investigation.