Journal of Endodontics
Volume 33, Issue 4 , Pages 399-402, April 2007

Factors Affecting Outcomes for Single-Tooth Implants and Endodontic Restorations

  • Scott L. Doyle, DDS, MS

      Affiliations

    • Private practice, Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota
    • ,
  • James S. Hodges, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Departments of Biostatistics and Developmental and Surgical Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
    • ,
  • Igor J. Pesun, DDS, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Restorative Dentistry, Division of Prosthodontics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
    • ,
  • Michael K. Baisden, DDS

      Affiliations

    • Division of Endodontics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
    • ,
  • Walter R. Bowles, DDS, MS

      Affiliations

    • Division of Endodontics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress requests for reprints to Dr. Walter Bowles, Division of Endodontics, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, 8–166 Moos Tower, 515 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.

published online 26 February 2007.

Abstract 

Initial root canal therapy and implant placement are both common treatment modalities, and, as such, prognostic factors that influence the treatment outcomes of these two restorations should be identified. In a retrospective chart review, 196 implant restorations and 196 matched initial nonsurgical root canal treated (NSRCT) teeth in patients were evaluated for four possible outcomes—success, survival, survival with intervention, and failure. Results showed that smokers had fewer successes and more failures in both groups (p = 0.0001), whereas NSRCT outcomes were affected by periradicular periodontitis (p = 0.001), post placement (p = 0.013), and overfilling (p = 0.003). Outcomes for both groups were not significantly affected by diabetes, age, or gender. Implant group outcomes were not affected by implant length (from 10 to 16 mm), diameter (from 3.25 to 5.5 mm), or an adjacent endodontically treated tooth, nor were NSRCT outcomes affected by the number of appointments for the procedure.

Key Words: Diabetes, endodontic, implant, outcomes, smoking

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 20.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0099-2399(06)01229-5

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.025

Journal of Endodontics
Volume 33, Issue 4 , Pages 399-402, April 2007

Article Tools