ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2025
Long-term follow-up of implants placed after Le Fort I osteotomy with interpositional autogenous bone grafts: a retrospective study.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral implantology has become a standard procedure for replacing missing teeth. However, patients with severe maxillary bone resorption often require complex surgical interventions, such as Le Fort I osteotomy with interpositional bone grafting, prior to implant placement. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of oral implants placed following this surgical technique. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe present study was two-fold. First, a retrospective review was performed using medical records and conventional panoramic radiographs from 26 patients who had undergone Le Fort I osteotomy with interpositional bone grafting and received either Astra Tech or Brånemark oral implants. Patients were followed for up to 5 years. Marginal bone loss was measured from the implant shoulder to the bone level. Implant survival and success rates were assessed, with success defined as bone loss of ≤ 2 mm during the first year and < 0.2 mm annually thereafter. Second, to assess the long-term outcomes of the two oral implant systems, all traceable patients were invited to undergo a follow-up radiographic examination up to 29 years post-treatment.
resultsThe combined survival rates for Astra Tech and Brånemark oral implants were 97.0%, 94.6%, and 94.1% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, with no additional implant loss observed by year 5. The overall success rate at 5 years was 56.1%, with Astra Tech implants showing a higher success rate (70.8%) compared to Brånemark implants (51.4%). Although there was no statistically significant difference in survival rates between the two systems, Astra Tech implants demonstrated significantly less marginal bone loss at both 1-year (p < 0.01) and 3-year (p = 0.021) follow-ups. For the long-term evaluation, 14 patients (54%) from the original cohort were traceable, of whom 4 patients (29%) participated in the follow-up. Among the 28 Brånemark implants assessed, none were lost, resulting in a 100% survival rate up to 29 years. The mean marginal bone loss of 2.6 ± 1.8 mm.
conclusionLe Fort I osteotomy with interpositional bone grafting, followed by oral implant placement and prosthetic rehabilitation, appears to be a reliable long-term treatment option for patients with severe maxillary atrophy, demonstrating favorable long-term survival-, and success rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.