Elsevier

Diabetes & Metabolism

Volume 38, Issue 1, February 2012, Pages 14-19
Diabetes & Metabolism

Review
Dental implants and diabetes: Conditions for successDiabète et implants dentaires : les conditions du succès

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabet.2011.10.002Get rights and content

Abstract

Aims

To assess the success of dental-implant treatment in patients with diabetes.

Background

Dental-implant treatment is an efficient means of replacing lost teeth. However, diabetes can be considered a relative contraindication for this type of treatment because of the slightly higher failure rate compared with populations without diabetes.

Recommendations

Prerequisite selection of suitable diabetic patients, eradication of co-morbidities (poor oral hygiene, cigarette-smoking, periodontitis), stabilization of glycaemic control (HbA1c at around 7%) and preventative measures against infection can increase the success of dental implantation in diabetic patients to a satisfactory rate of 85–95%.

Conclusion

Implant surgery is never a matter of urgency; thus, diabetes patients with the best chances of success should be conjointly selected and prepared by both dental and diabetes clinicians.

Résumé

But

Les conditions de la pose d’implants dentaires chez le diabétique sont examinées.

État des lieux

Les implants dentaires sont un moyen efficace de remplacement des dents manquantes. Mais le diabète est encore considéré comme une contre-indication relative de ce traitement du fait d’une incidence d’échecs légèrement supérieure à celle observée dans la population non diabétique.

Recommandations

Cependant, à la condition de réunir des préalables, sélection des patients éligibles, éradications de co-morbidités (mauvaise hygiène buccodentaire, tabagisme, périodontie), stabilisation du contrôle glycémique (HbA1c proche de 7 %) et des mesures préventives de l’infection, les chances de succès de la pose d’implants chez les patients diabétiques peuvent être satisfaisantes (85–95 %).

Conclusions

La chirurgie implantaire n’est jamais une urgence et les patients éligibles doivent être sélectionnés et préparés conjointement par le dentiste et le diabétologue.

Introduction

There is considerable evidence to suggest that periodontal disease and diabetes are linked in a reciprocating cycle. Diabetes is a risk factor for periodontitis, which appears to develop at least twice as often in diabetics as in populations without diabetes [1]. In addition, periodontal infection can affect glycaemic control in diabetic patients [2]. These coexisting conditions can lead to the gradual loss of tooth attachment to alveolar bone, resulting in tooth loss. Becoming partially or totally edentulous is the possible outcome, and is known as the “sixth complication” of diabetes. However, diabetes specialists are unfamiliar with dental pathology, and are not particularly concerned about either the prevention or cure of dental and periodontal complications, preferring to refer their patients to a dentist's expertise and care. Nevertheless, most professional recommendations suggest the usefulness of a dialogue between these two different specialists regarding diabetic patients’ dental care [3]. Indeed, diabetologists are frequently questioned by their patients or by dental clinicians regarding the indications and/or absence of contraindications for dental endosseous-implant treatment.

Dental-implant treatment is an efficient means of replacing lost teeth [4]. However, diabetes has been considered as a risky condition, as it can cause delayed healing, unstable fibrointegration and infections. Treatment can fail because of premature loss of the implant or defects in osseointegration, leading to eventual implant failure. Accordingly, diabetes remains a relative contraindication for implant therapy [5]. To improve the global success rate and reduce the risk of complications, both the identification of suitable patients for such treatment and standardization of its procedures are needed.

Section snippets

Diabetes and tooth loss

The oral complications of diabetes can greatly increase the risk of becoming partially or totally edentulous. The causes are manifold: gingivitis, periodontal disease, xerostomia, increased susceptibility to infection, caries and periapical lesions may all lead to increased rates of tooth extraction [6], [7]. The risk of deterioration of metabolic control by not eliminating the causes of chronic infection can also lead the dental clinician to anticipate tooth extraction in some cases, which can

Endosseous-implant treatment

The implant has an artificial titanium root (Fig. 1) that is surgically buried in the maxillary or mandibular bone. A prerequisite condition is that there must be sufficient osseous bone surrounding the implant – approximately 1 mm in depth. An intimate relationship between the bone and the implant becomes established during the healing process, known as “osseointegration” [4]. This process is indispensable for the stability and longevity of the implant, which secondarily supports the prosthetic

Implants and diabetes

A literature review has confirmed the value of this type of treatment for type 2 diabetes patients. However, few studies have compared the success rate of dental intraosseous implants in diabetic patients and in healthy, non-diabetic populations. These series do suggest, nevertheless, that there is a greater risk associated with diabetes, although the amplitude of the risk appears to vary. In the study by Morris et al. [16], 255 diabetic patients from a cohort of 613 subjects were analyzed. The

Practical considerations

Diabetes is not an absolute contraindication for dental osseoimplantation treatment [5], [27]. In fact, the global success rate, as observed in well-controlled diabetic patients, is good (85–95%), and only slightly lower than in healthy, non-diabetic populations. It is worth noting that implant surgery is never a matter of urgency. This means that, prior to the procedure, dental and diabetes specialists can verify that the treatment has a reasonable chance of success. In this case, patients

Conclusion

Dental-implant surgery is feasible in selected diabetic patients with the proviso of careful patients’ preparation and follow-up. These conditions reinforce the need for a dialogue between dental clinicians and diabetologists in order to offer diabetic patients the best chances of success with tooth-replacement procedures.

Disclosure of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning this article.

References (42)

  • B.S. MacAllister et al.

    Bone augmentation techniques

    J Periodontal

    (2007)
  • P. Malo et al.

    Short implants placed one-stage in maxillae and mandibles: a retrospective clinical study with 1 to 9 years of follow-up

    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res

    (2007)
  • M. Roccuzzo et al.

    Ten-year results of a three-arm prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients. Part 1: implant loss and radiographic bone loss

    Clin Oral Implants Res

    (2010)
  • M.A. Sanchez-Garcés et al.

    Short implants: a descriptive study of 273 implants

    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res

    (2010)
  • M. Davarpana et al.

    Manuel d’implantologie clinique : concepts protocoles et innovations récentes

    (2008)
  • H.P. Weber et al.

    Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding loading protocols

    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants

    (2009)
  • H.F. Morris et al.

    Implant survival in patients with type 2 diabetes: placement to 36 months

    Ann Periodontol

    (2000)
  • P.K. Moy et al.

    Dental implant failure rates and associated risk factors

    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants

    (2005)
  • G. Alsaadi et al.

    Impact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of late oral implant loss

    Clin Oral Implants Res

    (2008)
  • A.F. Shernoff et al.

    Implants for type II diabetic patients: interim report. VA Implants in diabetes study group

    Implant Dent

    (1994)
  • M. Esposito et al.

    Failure patterns of four osseointegrated oral implant systems

    J Mater Sci Mater Med

    (1997)
  • Cited by (0)

    1

    First authors contributed equally.

    View full text