We have located links that may give you full text access.
Implant treatment in pharmacologically immunosuppressed liver transplant patients: A prospective-controlled study.
Clinical Oral Implants Research 2018 January
OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this prospective study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of implant therapy in liver transplant patients (LTP). The secondary goal was to assess several implant- and patient-dependent variables, such as peri-implantitis (PI), peri-implant mucositis (PIM), bone loss (BL), and immediate postoperative complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two groups, including 16 pharmacologically immunosuppressed LTP and 16 matched controls, received 52 and 54 implants, respectively, between 1999 and 2008. After evaluating the postoperative healing, a mean follow-up of more than 8 years was carried out, and radiographic, clinical, and periodontal parameters were recorded to evaluate implant survival and implant- and patient-dependent outcomes.
RESULTS: The early postsurgical complications were similar in both groups. Implant survival rate was 100% in the LTP group and 98.15% in the CG. PIM was diagnosed in 35.42% of the implants and 64.29% of the patients of LTP group (LTPG) and in 43.40% of the implants and 56.25% of the patients in the CG. PI was detected in 4.17% of the implants and 7.10% of the patients in the LTPG and in 9.43% of the implants and 18.80% of the patients in the CG.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacologically immunosuppression in liver transplant patients was not a risk factor for implant failure, nor for the incidence of peri-implant diseases. Liver transplant is not a contraindication for dental implant treatment, although these patients should be carefully monitored during follow-up care.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two groups, including 16 pharmacologically immunosuppressed LTP and 16 matched controls, received 52 and 54 implants, respectively, between 1999 and 2008. After evaluating the postoperative healing, a mean follow-up of more than 8 years was carried out, and radiographic, clinical, and periodontal parameters were recorded to evaluate implant survival and implant- and patient-dependent outcomes.
RESULTS: The early postsurgical complications were similar in both groups. Implant survival rate was 100% in the LTP group and 98.15% in the CG. PIM was diagnosed in 35.42% of the implants and 64.29% of the patients of LTP group (LTPG) and in 43.40% of the implants and 56.25% of the patients in the CG. PI was detected in 4.17% of the implants and 7.10% of the patients in the LTPG and in 9.43% of the implants and 18.80% of the patients in the CG.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacologically immunosuppression in liver transplant patients was not a risk factor for implant failure, nor for the incidence of peri-implant diseases. Liver transplant is not a contraindication for dental implant treatment, although these patients should be carefully monitored during follow-up care.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app