MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Immediate Occlusal Loading of Brånemark System® TiUnite™ Implants Placed Predominantly in Soft Bone: 4‐Year Results of a Prospective Clinical Study

2005· article· en· W2006963140 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P Schärer, Roland Glauser, Petra Ruhstaller, Simone Windisch, Anja Zembic, AnnaKarin Lundgren, Jan Gottlow, Christoph H. F. Hämmerle

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentistryMedicineSoft tissueImplantResonance frequency analysisProsthesisRadiographyOrthodonticsDental prosthesisProspective cohort studyOsseointegrationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immediate occlusal implant loading has been documented as a viable treatment option for various indications. However, most of the available studies reported on the short-term outcome of this treatment modality. PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to document, on a long-term basis, the outcome of immediate occlusally loaded Brånemark System Mk IV TiUnite (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) implants placed to support fixed reconstructions in various regions of the jaws. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients received a total of 51 fixed prosthetic reconstructions, all of which were connected on the day of implant insertion. Twenty restorations replaced single teeth, 30 were fixed partial dentures, and 1 was a full-arch fixed lower restoration. These prostheses were supported by 102 Brånemark System Mk IV TiUnite implants (38 maxillary and 64 mandibular), the majority of which were placed in posterior regions (88%) and mainly in soft bone (76%). Resonance frequency measurements and marginal periimplant soft tissue evaluations were conducted during the course of the study. Furthermore, radiographic examinations were performed at the time of prosthesis delivery and at the 1- and 6-month and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year follow-up visits. This report summarizes the results after 4 years of loading. RESULTS: Three maxillary implants were removed, although stable, in one patient at the 8-week follow-up owing to postoperative infection in the adjacent guided bone regeneration area. No implants were lost further on. This resulted in a cumulative implant success rate of 97.1% after 4 years of prosthetic loading. The mean marginal bone remodeling after 4 years of function was 1.3 +/- SD 0.9 mm. At 4 years, absence of marginal plaque and bleeding on probing was reported for 87% and 69% of the sites, respectively, thereby remaining unchanged since the 1-year follow-up. On average, the interproximal soft tissue fill increased for both mesial and distal papillae from scores of 1.4 +/- 1.1 and 1.0 +/- 1.1, respectively, at the preoperative assessment to 2.0 +/- 0.8 and 1.7 +/- 0.8, respectively, at the 4-year assessment. CONCLUSION: The applied immediate loading protocol, in combination with a slightly tapered implant design and a modified implant surface texture, was shown to be a successful treatment alternative in regions exhibiting soft bone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations284
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207