A Retrospective study of the type of patients, the distribution of implant and the survival rate of Xive(R) implant

This study is an analysis of types of patients and distribution of implant site and survival rate of implant. The following results on patient type, implant distribution and survival rate were compiled from 324 implant cases of 140 patients treated at the periodontal dept. of Yonsei University Hospital and G dental clinic between February 2003 and April 2006. 1. There are no dissimilarities between men and women, with patients in their 30, 40, 50s accounting for 80% of patients and accounted for 82% of implant treatments; the largest share of patients and implant treatments. 2. Mn, posterior area. accounted for 57% of implant treatments followed by Mx. posterior area(29%), Mx, anterior area(8%) and Mn, anterior area(6%). 3. Partial edentulous patients treated by single crown and bridge-type prosthesis accounted for 96% and fully edentulous patient accounted for the remaining 4%. 4. The major cause of tooth loss is periodontal disease, followed by dental canes, trauma and congenital missing. 5, The distribution of bone quality for maxillae was 54,2% for type III, followed by 30.8% for type II, 15% for type IV and 0% for type I. As for mandible, the distribution was 63% for type II, followed by 34% for type III, 2,5% for type I and 0,5% for type IV. 6. The distribution of bone quantity for maxillae was 55% for type C, followed by 35% for type B, 8% for type D and 2% for type A. As for mandible, the distribution was 60% for type B, followed by 32% for type C, 7% for type A and 0% for type D. 7. The majority of implants were those of 9.5-13 mm in length(95%) and regular diameter in width(82%). 8. The total survival rate was 98%. The survival rate was 97% in the maxillae region and 99% in the mandible region. 9. The survival rate in type I was 83%, in type II was 99%, in type III was 97% and in type IV was 100%. As for the bone quantity, the survival rate in type A and D(100%) was most, followed by type B(99%) and type C(96%). The results showed that implant could be used satisfactorily compare for the other implant system. But we most to approach carefully in certain extreme condition especially with poor bone quality and quantity.ope