Single Implant Treatment in Healing versus Healed Sites of the Anterior Maxilla: A Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim was to document the Nobelreplace tapered TiUnite® (Nobel Biocare, Göteborg, Sweden) implant system used by experienced clinicians in daily practice for replacing single maxillary anterior teeth and to compare the clinical and radiographic outcome between implants installed in healing sites (early implant placement) and fully healed sites (conventional implant placement) after on average two and a half years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study in patients who had been treated by two periodontists and two prosthodontists in 2006 and 2007 was conducted. Surgical treatment involved standard flap elevation without releasing incisions and restorative procedures included cemented crowns in all patients. Only straightforward single implant treatments in healing sites (6-8 weeks following tooth extraction) and fully-healed sites (≥6 months following tooth extraction) were considered with both neighboring teeth present and without the need for hard and/or soft tissue grafting. Clinical and radiographic analyses of all implants were performed by a blinded clinician who had not been involved in the treatment. RESULTS: Forty-nine of the 53 eligible single implants (22 early and 27 conventionally placed implants) in 44/48 patients were available for scrutiny. There was no significant difference in implant survival between early (95%) and conventionally (93%) installed implants (p = 1.000). Mean bone level to the implant-abutment interface was 1.25 and 1.02 mm for early and conventional implant placement, respectively (p = .220). In spite of fairly low plaque levels (26%), overall peri-implant bleeding was quite prevalent (36%). Mean peri-implant probing depth was 3.3 mm. Five restorations had experienced technical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Single Nobelreplace tapered TiUnite® implants installed in healing as well as in healed sites of the anterior maxilla are predictable. Both strategies seem equally successful in terms of implant survival, bone remodeling, clinical response, and risk for complications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".