Association between clinical and demographic variables and the success of single-tooth dental implants: A cross-sectional study

Abstract

The success of single-tooth dental implants is determined by a complex interplay of clinical, anatomical, prosthetic, and patient-related factors. This cross-sectional study and data were analyzed using the Chi-square test. Implant depth emerged as the only statistically significant factor (p = 0.020), with equicrestal placement associated with more favorable outcomes. The remaining variables did not show significant correlations with success or survival. These findings reinforce the importance of vertical positioning and suggest avenues for further research.

Keywords

Single-tooth implant, implant depth, crown-to-implant ratio, implant success, gingival recession, marginal bone loss, prosthetic planning.

Introduction

While dental implants are considered reliable for tooth replacement, success depends on numerous variables. This study explores whether patient demographics and implant/prosthetic design factors affect clinical outcomes. Prior research has debated the role of crown height, implant angulation, or bone density, but few have statistically compared multiple factors simultaneously.

Materials and Methods

An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted at SEGi University, involving 61 healthy patients aged 30–70, rehabilitated with a single implant with a minimum of 5 years of function. Radiographic and clinical data were gathered, and Chi-square tests evaluated associations.

Clinical Exam Criteria:
- Gingival recession: recession recorded if gingival margin was apical to prosthetic crown margin.

Radiographic Parameters:

Key radiographic measurements:
- Implant angulation
- Crown design (straight, mesially, distally placed)
- Implant depth (equicrestal or subcrestal)
- Bone resorption levels
- Crown-to-implant ratio

Results

Of the eight variables assessed, implant depth showed a statistically significant relationship with clinical success (p = 0.020). Equicrestal implants had better outcomes. Other factors including age, gender, ethnicity, implant length, crown design, crown-to-implant ratio, and angulation showed no significant influence (p > 0.05).

Discussion

The analysis revealed implant depth as the most influential factor in implant success. Equicrestal placements preserved marginal bone levels better than subcrestal. While variations in other parameters were observed, none reached statistical significance. Limitations include sample size and lack of control for oral hygiene or abutment height.

Conclusion

This study underscores the importance of vertical positioning in implant placement. Other demographic and prosthetic factors, while clinically relevant, did not show statistically significant effects in this cohort. Larger, multicenter trials are recommended. Acknowledgments Special thanks to SEGi University, the Faculty of Dentistry, and all study participants.

 

---

Co-authors:

Dr Johnson Lu Yew Wang
Dr Hafni Adiba binti Azman
Dr Gan Wei Shan
Dr Fatmah Binti Ibrahim

Topics: