Comparison Between the Long-Term Survival Rates of Tooth Preservation and Dental Implants: An In Vivo Study

Rupali Baban Wetam; Chirag R Vaniya; Snigdha Biswas; Palapati Chamanthi; Gatha Mohanty; Priyatam Karade; Sajni Rai

doi:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1231_25

Comparison Between the Long-Term Survival Rates of Tooth Preservation and Dental Implants: An In Vivo Study

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2025 Dec;17(Suppl 4):S3159-S3161. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1231_25. Epub 2025 Dec 17.

Authors

Rupali Baban Wetam¹, Chirag R Vaniya², Snigdha Biswas³, Palapati Chamanthi⁴, Gatha Mohanty⁵, Priyatam Karade¹, Sajni Rai⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
² Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Government Dental College and Hospital, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India.
³ Department of Periodontology and Implantology, BBD College of Dental Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
⁴ Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, CKS Teja Institute of Dental Sciences, Andhra Pradesh, India.
⁵ Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Institute of Dental Science, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
⁶ Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, (Nitte Deemed to be University), Mangaluru, Karnataka, India.

Abstract

Background: The long-term prognosis of natural teeth and dental implants has been a critical subject in restorative dentistry. While dental implants offer a predictable solution for missing teeth, preserving natural dentition is often preferred when feasible.

Materials and methods: A total of 200 participants aged between 25 and 65 years were enrolled in this prospective in vivo study, conducted from January 2014 to January 2024. Group A consisted of 100 patients with endodontically treated and periodontally maintained natural teeth, while Group B included 100 patients rehabilitated with single dental implants. Survival was defined as the functional presence of the tooth/implant without the need for extraction or removal. Patients were evaluated annually for mobility, bone loss, peri-implantitis, or secondary caries using clinical and radiographic criteria. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier survival estimate and Chi-square test with significance set at P < 0.05.

Results: After a 10-year follow-up, the overall survival rate was 88% for preserved natural teeth and 92% for dental implants. Group A showed failures primarily due to vertical root fractures and recurrent periodontal infections, while Group B experienced failures due to peri-implantitis and biomechanical overload. The difference in survival was not statistically significant (P = 0.172), indicating comparable long-term outcomes between both interventions.

Conclusion: Tooth preservation and dental implants demonstrated similar long-term survival rates in this study. Preserving natural dentition remains a viable and effective option when clinical conditions permit, with dental implants serving as a reliable alternative when tooth retention is unfeasible.

Keywords: Dental implants; implant failure; in vivo study; long-term survival; peri-implantitis; prosthodontics; root canal therapy; tooth preservation.