Preliminary Report of Immediately Loaded Altiva Natural Tooth Replacement Dental Implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osseointegration may be described as a direct contact between living bone and an alloplastic implant. It is thought that a period of undisturbed healing is required to ensure osseointegration. The length of the healing period is dependent on a number of factors, such as implant material, surface configuration, site preparation technique, bone quality, healing capacity of the osteotomy, and implant design. Elimination of the healing period offers distinct advantages in terms of cost of therapy and convenience to patients. Recently, a new one-piece implant design was proposed that provides improved stability of the implant to allow immediate support of an interim prosthesis. PURPOSE: This article presents the initial clinical experiences when the Altiva Natural Tooth Replacement one-piece implant was used in a human clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter study of the placement and immediate loading of the one-piece implant. A total of 142 implants were placed in the jaws of 93 patients. Implants were placed consecutively and were followed at specified intervals in three private clinical practices. Clinical performance was recorded relative to implant survival and prosthesis support. RESULTS: The implant survival rate was 93.7%, with similar responses in the maxilla (95.0%) and the mandible (92.7%). When implant failure occurred, it was observed as mobility without infection within 3 to 5 weeks of implant insertion. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this trial, there is promising evidence that this implant design can succeed at rates similar to other designs that require conventional healing times.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".