Histology of Retrieved Immediately and Early Loaded Oxidized Implants: Light Microscopic Observations after 5 to 9 Months of Loading in the Posterior Mandible
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increased number of publications report that one-stage surgery and immediate/early loading of dental implants may be a feasible approach for prosthetic reconstruction of the edentate patient. However, little is known about the histologic response to implants subjected to immediate/early loading in patients. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to histologically evaluate oxidized titanium implants subjected to loading immediately following surgery or after 2 months of healing and removed after 5 to 9 months loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five patients participated in the study; each had consulted for implant treatment in the posterior mandible and subsequently volunteered to have extra implants inserted for the purpose of histologic research. Nine oxidized titanium implants (Brånemark System TiUnite , Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) were retrieved after 5 to 9 months in function. Two implants had been loaded the same day, whereas seven implants were loaded after 2 months of healing. Resonance frequency analysis was performed at retrieval on seven implants. Ground sections were prepared for histology and analyzed using light microscopic morphometry. RESULTS: Seven and 8.5 mm implants were placed, predominantly in quality 3 and 4 bone. Four implants were straight (Mk III), and five were tapered (Mk IV). All implants were clinically stable at retrieval and showed ISQ values of 65 to 79 with a mean of 71.4 +/- 4.4. Eight of the implants were able to be used for histology. A gross histologic examination showed an undisturbed healing of soft and bone tissues with no apparent differences between response to immediately and early loaded implants. Lamellar bone surrounded the implants, and remodeling was evident and more marked near the implant surface. A condensation of bone toward the implant surface was seen; this resulted in a lamina dura-like structure in trabecular bone. Thin rims of newly formed bone were often seen following the contour of the implant surface. The morphometric measurements showed a mean bone-to-implant contact value of 84.2 +/- 10.5% and a mean bone area value of 79.1 +/- 6.8%. The two immediately loaded implants showed bone-to-implant contact and bone area values of 92.9 +/- 0.1% and 84.9 +/- 0.9%, respectively. The corresponding values for the six early loaded implants were 81.4 +/- 10.6% and 77.1 +/- 6.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that oxidized implants subjected to immediate or early loading do integrate with soft and bone tissues in the posterior mandible.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".