Ten‐Year Results of a Prospective Study Using Porous‐Surfaced Dental Implants and a Mandibular Overdenture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Numerous investigators have used osseointegrated dental implants as retention for mandibular overdentures, but few have reported 10-year outcomes or incorporated carefully standardized radiographs to document crestal bone loss. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to use a prospective clinical trial design to assess the performance of short sintered porous-surfaced dental implants with a mandibular complete overdenture when all patients in the trial had undergone 10 years of continuous function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two fully edentulous patients, most with advanced alveolar ridge resorption, each received three free-standing Endopore implants (7-10 mm in length, mean length, 8.7 mm; Innova Corporation, Toronto, ON, Canada) in the mandibular symphysis region. After 10 weeks of submerged healing, these implants were used to support an overdenture. Carefully standardized radiographs, using a customized stainless steel filmholder attached to each implant and the x-ray tube, were collected at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, yearly to 5 years, and then again at 7and 10 years. RESULTS: Life table analysis revealed a 10-year implant survival of 92.7% and a mean annual bone loss after year 1 of 0.03 mm. CONCLUSION: Short free-standing dental implants with a sintered porous surface used for implant fixation are a predictable and effective means of retaining a mandibular overdenture in patients with advanced mandibular ridge resorption.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".