Bruxism and dental implant treatment complications: a retrospective comparative study of 98 bruxer patients and a matched group

doi:10.1111/clr.12844

Paper

Bruxism and dental implant treatment complications: a retrospective comparative study of 98 bruxer patients and a matched group

Published Jul 1, 2017 · B. Chrcanovic, J. Kisch, T. Albrektsson

Clinical Oral Implants Research

Q1 SJR score

99

Citations

2

Influential Citations

Full textSemantic Scholar

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To analyze the complications of dental implant treatment in a group of patients with bruxism in comparison with a matched group of non-bruxers. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients being diagnosed as bruxers were identified within a group of patients consecutively treated with implant-supported prostheses at one specialist clinic, based on the most recent listed sign and symptoms of bruxism according to the International Classification of Sleep Disorders. A diagnostic grading system of "possible," "probable," and "definite" sleep or awake bruxism was used, according to a recent published international consensus. A case-control matching model was used to match the bruxers with a group of non-bruxers, based on five variables. Implant-, prosthetic-, and patient-related data were collected, as well as 14 mechanical complications, and compared between groups. RESULTS Ninety-eight of 2670 patients were identified as bruxers. The odds ratio of implant failure in bruxers in relation to non-bruxers was 2.71 (95% CI 1.25, 5.88). Considering the same number of patients with the same total number of implants equally distributed between groups, the bruxers group had a higher prevalence of mechanical complications in comparison with the non-bruxers group. CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that bruxism may significantly increase both the implant failure rate and the rate of mechanical and technical complications of implant-supported restorations. Other risk factors may also have influenced the results.

Observational Study

Highly Cited

Study Snapshot

Bruxism significantly increases the implant failure rate and mechanical complications in dental implant treatment compared to non-bruxers.

PopulationOlder adults (50-71 years)

Sample size24

MethodsObservational

OutcomesBody Mass Index projections

ResultsSocial networks mitigate obesity in older groups.

Sign up to use Study Snapshot

Consensus is limited without an account. Create an account or sign in to get more searches and use the Study Snapshot.

Create an account

Paper

Bruxism and dental implant treatment complications: a retrospective comparative study of 98 bruxer patients and a matched group

Sign up to use Study Snapshot

References

Bruxism and Dental Implants: A Meta-Analysis

Bruxism may not affect dental implant failure rates, as the real effect of bruxing habits on osseointegration and survival of endosteal dental implants remains unclear.

Influence of Temperature and Acid Etching Time on the Superficial Characteristics of Ti

High temperature and longer etching time combined with a combination of high temperature and a longer etching time significantly increase surface roughness and brittleness in titanium grade IV.

Reasons for failures of oral implants.

Dental implant failures are influenced by factors such as low insertion torque, inexperienced surgeons, placement in maxilla, posterior regions, heavy smokers, and small bone volumes.

Is bruxism a risk factor for dental implants? A systematic review of the literature.

Bruxism is unlikely to be a risk factor for biological complications around dental implants, but may be a risk factor for mechanical complications.

Correlation between self-reported and clinically based diagnoses of bruxism in temporomandibular disorders patients.

Self-reported and clinically based diagnoses of bruxism are strongly correlated for awake clenching, but less so for sleep-time activities.

Citations