Immediate Fixed Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla: A Prospective Clinical and Radiological Study after 3 Years of Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of immediate full-arch fixed maxillary prosthesis supported by two axial and four tilted implants after 3 years of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients with atrophic maxilla were consecutively enrolled and treated. Each patient received a fixed full-arch maxillary rehabilitation supported by four tilted implants that engaged the posterior and the anterior sinus walls and two axial anterior implants. A total of 192 implants (30 Brånemark System MK IV and 162 NobelSpeedy Groovy, Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) were inserted and immediately loaded. The definitive restorations were placed 6 months later, and follow-up visits were scheduled every 6 months. During follow-ups, marginal bone loss (MBL), plaque and bleeding scores, and patient's satisfaction were recorded. RESULTS: All patients reached at least 3-year follow-up examination (range 36-78, average 55.53 months). Two tilted implants failed before delivering the definitive restoration, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 98.96%. All final prostheses were stable and functional, resulting in a cumulative survival and success rate of 100%. At the 3-year follow-up there was no significant difference in MBL between axial (1.55 ± 0.31 mm) and tilted implants (1.46 ± 0.19 mm) (p = .05). Plaque and bleeding scores decreased over time, while patient's satisfaction in both aesthetics and function increased. CONCLUSIONS: Implants placement with this configuration could be considered a predictable and cost- and time-effective alternative approach for the immediate restoration of the edentulous maxilla, avoiding bone grafting procedures, even with a medium-term follow-up.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".