Analysis of prosthetic outcomes and influencing factors in patients with alveolar bone atrophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/aos.v85.46467Keywords:
Alveolar bone atrophy, dental implantation, implant-supported prosthesis, influencing factors, retrospective studyAbstract
Objective: To investigate implant-supported prosthetic outcomes and influencing factors in alveolar bone atrophy.
Material and methods: One hundred and fifty patients with atrophy receiving implants (2021–2022) were followed for 2 years. Success (n = 97, 64.7%) and failure (n = 53, 35.3%) groups were compared using univariate analysis, followed by multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with overall failure and Cox regression to assess time to failure.
Results: Univariate analysis identified age, gender, smoking, implant length, and prosthesis type as significant (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression showed short implant length (< 10 mm) as the sole independent risk factor for failure (OR = 4.418, p = 0.004); age ≥ 60 years (OR = 2.560, p = 0.094) and female gender (OR = 1.127, p = 0.807) were not significant. Multivariable Cox regression revealed age ≥ 60 years as a significant predictor of earlier failure (HR = 2.558, p = 0.010), while female gender and short implants were not (p > 0.05). Kaplan–Meier curves showed significant survival differences for age (p = 0.010), gender (p = 0.023), and implant length (p = 0.021).
Conclusion: Short implant independently increases failure risk; age ≥ 60 years accelerates failure. Bone augmentation is preferred. Findings need validation.
Downloads
References
Carlsson GE, Persson G. Morphologic changes of the mandible after extraction and wearing of dentures. A longitudinal, clinical, and x-ray cephalometric study covering 5 years. Odontol Revy. 1967;18(1):27–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356709072522
Alotaibi FF, Rocchietta I, Buti J, D’Aiuto F. Comparative evidence of different surgical techniques for the management of vertical alveolar ridge defects in terms of complications and efficacy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2023;50(11):1487–519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13850
Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: an updated systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(10):1949–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.06.166
Windael S, Collaert B, De Buyser S, Vervaeke S, De Bruyn H. A 10-year retrospective clinical study to identify risk indicators for peri-implant bone loss and implant failure. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2025;36(2):202–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14375
Vaira LA, Biglio A, Favro A, Salzano G, Abbate V, Lechien JR, et al. Implant-prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior mandible with additively manufactured custom-made subperiosteal implants: a cohort study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024;53(6):533–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2024.01.003
Cankaya RTA, Muglali M. Evaluation of factors affecting implant failure: a 13-year retrospective cohort study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2025;53(8):1061–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2025.03.022
Yu F, Wei SB, Zhang X, Guo SG, Wei HW, Huang JQ. Vertical bone augmentation using GBR combined with transalveolar sinus floor elevation: a case report. Chin J Oral Implantol. 2025;30(5):495–501.
Kendall MG. Rank correlation methods. Br J Psychol. 1990;25(1):86–91.
Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Singh M, Weber HP, Gallucci GO. Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review. J Dent Res. 2012;91(3):242–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034511431252
Terheyden H. Augmentation surgery. Berlin: Quintessence Publishing; 2022.
Gholampour A, Mollaei M, Ehsani H, Ghobadi F, Hosseinnataj A, Yazdani M. Evaluation of the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the detection of peri-implant fenestration. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):922. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04674-z
AlRowis R, Albelaihi F, Alquraini H, Almojel S, Alsudais A, Alaqeely R. Factors affecting dental implant failure: a retrospective analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2025;13(12):1356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13121356
Al-Johany SS, Al Amri MD, Alsaeed S, Alalola B. Dental implant length and diameter: a proposed classification scheme. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(3):252–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12517
Ramanauskaite A, Schwarz F, Sader R. Influence of width of keratinized tissue on the prevalence of peri-implant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022;33(Suppl. 23):8–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13766
Benzaquen SI, Ardakani MT, Tsigarida A, Ercoli C, Barmak B, Chochlidakis KM, et al. Biologic complications with removable partial dentures assisted by short implants: a 34-month pilot randomized controlled clinical trial. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(6):2311–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.01.026
Tang C, Du Q, Luo J, Peng L. Simultaneous placement of short implants (≤ 8 mm) versus standard length implants (≥ 10 mm) after sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxillae: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent. 2022;8(1):45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00443-1
Schwartz-Arad D, Bichacho N. Effect of age on single implant submersion rate in the central maxillary incisor region: a long-term retrospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(3):509–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12131
Abou-Ayash S, Bjelopavlovic M, Molinero-Mourelle P, Schimmel M. Implant survival in patient populations with a mean age of 65–75 years compared to older cohorts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2025;36(9):1053–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14456
Schimmel M, Srinivasan M, McKenna G, Muller F. Effect of advanced age and/or systemic medical conditions on dental implant survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(Suppl. 16):311–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13288
DeLuca S, Zarb G. The effect of smoking on osseointegrated dental implants. Part II: Peri-implant bone loss. Int J Prosthodont. 2006;19(6):560–6.
Cho JM, Hong N, Rhee Y, Park W, Oh KC, Seo Y, et al. Clinical outcomes and bone marker changes in postmenopausal women with dental implants: a one-year prospective study. Int J Implant Dent. 2025;11(1):41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00628-4
Chalazoniti A, Lattanzi W, Halazonetis DJ. Shape variation and sex differences of the adult human mandible evaluated by geometric morphometrics. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):8546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-57617-7
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wei Zhang, Chang’ao Xue, Yan Chen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica publishes high quality original research papers as well as critical reviews relevant on diseases of the oral cavity, their treatment, epidemiology and associated biomaterials and their development.
