WELCOME TO PI
Info About PI
Why a Prosthodontist?
Meet Our Doctors
Research Programs
What's New At PI?
Free Video Offer

DENTAL
TREATMENT
Dental Implants
Treatment Options
Prosthesis Types
Bone Grafting
Dental Implants &
Congenital Deformities
Bad Breath
Orthodontic Treatment
Combined with
Procera Crowns

HEALTH-ISSUES
AND DENTISTRY
Bone Loss and Aging
Heart Illness & Dentistry
Snoring/Sleep Apnea
Osteoporosis
Cancer Information
Drugs and Dentistry
Smoking & Implants
Other Medical

Insights Newsletter Continues next page

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10

PDF File available
for this Insights Newsletter.

Evidence has shown that conventional removable dentures are poor substitutes for missing natural teeth. Essentially a conventional removable denture becomes quite a compromise of quantitative and qualitative support. Studies have shown a significant number of patients in all age groups experience difficulty in obtaining comfortable and efficient oral function with a removable prosthesis. Several studies have shown the relationship between adequate oral function and proper digestion and nutrition; and where oral function is compromised, so too is nutritional status.

Because the life expectancy of edentulous patients will increase, the risk of denture dissatisfaction and its functional implications can only be prolonged. Published clinical data for osseointegrated dental implant treatment of maladaptive patients has led to the clinical impression that a stable prosthesis could preclude most of the problems associated with complete denture wearing. The original studies on osseointegrated dental implants were done on maladaptive edentulous patients. Age did not enter into either the inclusion or exclusion criteria. Any geriatric patient whose systemic health did not preclude a minor oral surgical procedure was considered a candidate for osseointegration. Previous studies have proven that age dependent differences in wound healing do not appear to effect the outcome of surgery in elderly subjects. And although a large percentage of post menopausal women may have or are developing osteoporosis, a recent study concluded that osteoporosis is not a contraindication for prescribing osseointegration.

The present study involved the overall results on Brånemark implants placed during the Toronto Study from 1979 to 1992 and compared those results to that of the subgroup of patients whose ages ranged from 60 to 81 years. Surgically related problems and complications encountered with the elderly patients in this study were similar to those reported in other studies and were not frequent in the elderly patient group. Data gathered from previous articles indicated that the survival rate for implants placed in elderly patients was similar to that of implants placed in other age groups.

To date this clinical study from Toronto supports the conclusion that neither advanced age itself, nor the diminished levels of oral hygiene that often accompany it, are alone contraindications to the prescription for treatment with osseointegration. Until recently being elderly and edentulous has undermined the quality of life for the patient. However patients who were elderly at the time their implants were placed, and patients who have grown elderly since implant insertion, have functioned successfully with implant supported prostheses of various designs throughout the years.