Prospective, Multicenter Evaluation of Trabecular Metal‐Enhanced Titanium Dental Implants Placed in Routine Dental Practices: 1‐Year Interim Report From the Development Period (2010 to 2011)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A prospective, multicenter study is currently evaluating a novel titanium implant with a highly porous tantalum midsection (tantalum material [TM]) placed in an uncontrolled patient population. PURPOSE: Interim 1-year results from the development period (2010-2011) are reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Investigators in 22 clinical sites located in five European countries randomly selected and treated partially edentulous patients in accordance with the implant's instructions for use and the investigators' professional judgments. Oversight was provided by the local institutional review boards. Subjects were treated with 1 to 2 TM dental implants in maxillary or mandibular location(s). RESULTS: To date, 105 patients with 57 maxillary and 88 mandibular implants have completed 1 year of clinical monitoring. Within this interim group, 28 patients had concomitant health conditions that may elevate risks for long-term crestal bone loss and/or implant survival. Three implants failed due to local or systemic infection, and four implants failed to integrate. Cumulative implant survival was 95.2% (n = 138/145) with 0.43 ± 0.57 mm of mean marginal bone loss in this interim group. CONCLUSION: TM dental implants were clinically effective under various clinical conditions in an uncontrolled patient population with and without concomitant health conditions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".