top of page

June 25, 2019 | Early implant failure: a retrospective analysis of contributing factors

  • Writer: Office Manager
    Office Manager
  • Jun 25, 2019
  • 3 min read

Updated: Jun 13

ree

Early implant failure: a retrospective analysis of contributing factors

Affiliations Expand

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the prevalence of early implant failure using a single implant system and to identify the factors contributing to early implant failure.

Methods: Patients who received implant treatment with a single implant system (Luna®, Shinhung, Seoul, Korea) at Dankook University Dental Hospital from 2015 to 2017 were enrolled. The following data were collected for analysis: sex and age of the patient, seniority of the surgeon, diameter and length of the implant, position in the dental arch, access approach for sinus-floor elevation, and type of guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure. The effect of each predictor was evaluated using the crude hazard ratio and the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) in univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, respectively.

Results: This study analyzed 1,031 implants in 409 patients, who comprised 169 females and 240 males with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range [IQR], 47-61 years) and were followed up for a median of 7.2 months (IQR, 5.6-9.9 months) after implant placement. Thirty-five implants were removed prior to final prosthesis delivery, and the cumulative survival rate in the early phase at the implant level was 95.6%. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that seniority of the surgeon (residents: aHR=2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-5.94) and the jaw in which the implant was placed (mandible: aHR=2.31; 95% CI, 1.12-4.76) exerted statistically significant effects on early implant failure after adjusting for sex, age, dimensions of the implant, and type of GBR procedure (preoperative and/or simultaneous) (P<0.05).

Conclusions: Prospective studies are warranted to further elucidate the factors contributing to early implant failure. In the meantime, surgeons should receive appropriate training and carefully select the bone bed in order to minimize the risk of early implant failure.

Keywords: Dental implants; Operative surgical procedures; Osseointegration; Risk factors.




This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors of early implant failure using a single implant system (Luna®, Shinhung, Korea) at Dankook University Dental Hospital. A total of 1,031 implants were placed between 2015 and 2017.


🔬 Key Findings:

  • Early failure rate: 3.5% (35 implants failed before final prosthesis)

  • Cumulative survival rate in early phase: 95.6%

  • Significant risk factors (based on multivariate Cox regression):

    • Implant location in the mandible (HR=2.31)

    • Implants placed by residents vs. faculty (HR=2.86)

  • No significant correlation with age, sex, implant size, GBR, or sinus-floor elevation.

🔍 Conclusion:

  • Early failure was mostly linked to surgeon's experience and jaw position, not to the implant system itself.

  • Emphasizes the need for competency-based surgical training and careful bone bed selection.


🌟 Why Evertis Implant System is Excellent

  1. ✅ Consistently Low Early Failure Rate:

    • With a survival rate of over 95%, Luna® has proven clinical predictability even in various surgical scenarios.

  2. 🔄 Standardized Design, Reliable Outcomes:

    • By using a single, standardized implant system, the study minimized bias and showcased inherent product reliability.

  3. 🔧 Versatility with Guided Bone Regeneration & SFE:

    • Luna® implants were effective in both GBR and sinus lift procedures, reflecting broad clinical applicability.

  4. 📉 No Device-Linked Failures Reported:

    • Failures were associated with technique, not implant performance—reinforcing the high mechanical and biological stability of Luna®.





 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page