MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Early Function of Splinted Implants in Maxillas and Posterior Mandibles, Using Brånemark System® Tiunite™ Implants: An 18‐Month Prospective Clinical Multicenter Study

2004· article· en· W2010078123 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leonardo Vanden Bogaerde, Giorgio Pedretti, Paolo Dellacasa, Marco Mozzati, Bo Rangert, Inger Wendelhag

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplantDentistryMedicineResonance frequency analysisProsthesisMaxillaMandible (arthropod mouthpart)Survival rateDental prosthesisImplant stability quotientBone resorptionInitial stabilityOrthodonticsOsseointegrationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immediate or early loading of implants placed in maxillas and posterior mandibles has been a concern as bone density is often low in these areas, making it difficult to establish good initial implant stability. By adapting implant design and insertion protocols, however, high initial implant stability may be achieved in these regions. Further, a modified implant surface texture has been proved to help in maintaining stability during the initial healing period. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical performance of oxidized titanium implants (TiUnite, Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) when used for early function in the maxilla and in the posterior mandible, locations where the bone density often is low. A further aim was to evaluate the marginal bone level at oxidized implants and compare it with that of machined-surface implants used in a previous study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients were consecutively included in the study, and 37 edentulous areas in maxillas and posterior mandibles were treated. Bruxism and uncontrolled periodontal disease were exclusion criteria. Temporary prostheses were generally placed within 9 days but not after 16 days from implant placement. A previous study applying the same study design and clinical protocol but using machined-surface implants was used for comparisons. RESULTS: Of the 111 implants installed, 1 failed, giving an overall survival rate of 99.1% after 18 months. The prosthesis survival was 100%. The marginal bone resorption was 0.8 mm (standard deviation [SD], 1.0), as opposed to 1.6 mm (SD, 1.3) in the previous study with machined-surface implants, but was not statistically significantly different (p = .10). CONCLUSION: The present clinical protocol (aiming at high primary stability) and the use of oxidized titanium implants for early functional loading in the maxilla and the posterior mandible resulted in a high implant survival rate and a favorable marginal bone level during a follow-up of 18 months. The difference in marginal bone resorption between the oxidized implants in the present study and the machined implants from a previous investigation with the same study design was not statistically significant.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations110
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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