Dental endosseous implants in the medically compromised patient.
The literature contains numerous observations on the significance of systemic disorders as contraindications to dental endosseous implant treatment, but the justification for these statements is often apparently allegorical. Although implants are increasingly used in healthy patients, their appropriateness in medically compromised patients is less equivocal. Perhaps surprisingly, the evidence of their efficacy in these groups of patients is quite sparse. Indeed, there are few if any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this field. Furthermore, any health risks from the placement of implants are unclear. We review the current evidence for the risks associated with endosseous implants in a range of systemic disorders. There is clearly a need for prospective systematic trials. The degree of disease-control may be far more important that the nature of the disorder itself, and individualized assessment, including the medical condition, quality of life and life expectancy is indicated. The benefits of implants to many of these patients may outweigh any risks. However, proper informed consent is mandatory.
Scully
C
C
Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK. c.scully@eastman.ucl.ac.uk
Hobkirk
J
J
Dios
P D
PD
D000437:Alcoholism / Q000150:complications; D001847:Bone Diseases / Q000150:complications; D017742:Dental Care for Chronically Ill / Q000379:methods*; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000379:methods*; D015921:Dental Implants; D048909:Diabetes Complications; D006474:Hemorrhagic Disorders / Q000150:complications; D006801:Humans; D016867:Immunocompromised Host; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000150:complications / Q000628:therapy
D015921:Dental Implants