Early Loading of Implants with Fixed Dental Prostheses in Edentulous Mandibles: 7.2‐Year Clinical Results from a Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective follow-up study was to evaluate survival and success of early-loaded implants placed in the edentulous mandible and the survival of the fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after in mean 7.2 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients (mean age 64.5 years, 18.9% male) received 185 implants in the intraforaminal area of the edentulous mandible (five implants per patient). Within 2 weeks, all implants were early loaded with fixed dental prostheses. The patients were recalled once a year for clinical and radiographic examinations. The 17 patients (79 implants) attending the recall in 2012 were additionally asked for their satisfaction of functional and aesthetic aspects. RESULTS: During a mean observation time of 7.2 years, 20 implants were lost in 11 patients, resulting in implant survival of 89.2%. Eight of all implants (4.3%) had too much marginal bone loss to satisfy the criteria of success. A total of 19 prosthetic complications and aftercare measurements had to be performed between in mean 4.5 to 7.2 years of observation. The survival of the original FDPs decreased to 83.8%. Of the 17 patients attending the recall in 2012, a total 59.5% had a satisfactory oral hygiene. According to the criteria of Albrektsson, the success rate for the remaining 79 implants was 89.9% after in mean 11.7 years. Patient satisfaction for assessment of functional and aesthetic aspects was in median 9 and 8 on the numeric rating scales. CONCLUSION: Long-term observation of in mean 7.2 years showed satisfactory results for both implant and superstructure survival. Prosthetic complications were easy to repair in most cases, but patients' ability for oral hygiene was reduced after the longer observation period. Especially in elderly patients, their attitudes and manual skills should be considered when planning the design of a new superstructure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".