Rodrigo Alves Ribeiro, Roberto Carlos Mourao Pinho, Rayanne Soraia de Aguiar Melo Dias, Pedro Tortamano, Andre Vajgel, Jung-Chul Park and Renata Cimoes
To compare the occurrence of implant failures using proposed criteria in the literature by different authors, through retrospective clinical studies. One hundred and eleven patients, rehabilitated with 245 dental implants Straumann®, was clinically and radiographically evaluated for by the following parameters: mobility, persistent subjective complaints, recurrent peri-implant infection with suppuration, continuous radiolucent around the implant, probing depth ≥ 5 mm and bleeding on probing. These parameters were grouped by different authors. In the presence of either these criteria, the implant was considered as failure. The groups were categorized regarding the follow-up period after implant loading. A statistically significant difference (p<0.01) was found between different failure criteria used in this sample. This ratio ranged from 5.3% according to the Buser et al. 1990 criteria to 36.7% in accordance with Ong et al. [1] criteria. The presence of bleeding on probing was the item that most characterized the failure, being observed in 73 (19.8%) implants. It was concluded that there is difference in the occurrence of failure among the proposed criteria by Ong et al. [1] related to Schnitman et al. [2], Albrektsson and Isidor [3], Buser et al. [4] and Mombelli and Lang [5] criteria.
