A Prospective Study of Immediate Functional Loading, Following the Teeth in a Day™ Protocol: A Case Series of 55 Consecutive Edentulous Maxillas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immediate loading of dental implants is increasingly gaining recognition as a viable option for both patient and clinician. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of 55 patients in a clinical investigation of immediate functional loading of Brånemark System implants (Nobel Biocare USA, Yorba Linda, CA) in edentulous maxillas. Its further purpose is to suggest a reliable and evidence-based protocol for immediate implant loading of full-arch prostheses in the maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 552 Brånemark System implants were placed in immediate extraction or healed sites; a mean number of 10 implants were placed per patient. The healthy subjects in need of full-arch maxillary implant reconstruction were treated between December 1999 and February 2004; 522 of the 552 implants were immediately loaded with screw-retained all-acrylic fixed prostheses at the time of surgery. Approximately 4 to 6 months later, the 30 submerged implants were uncovered, and a definitive metal-reinforced prosthesis was delivered to each patient. RESULTS: The immediately loaded implant cumulative survival rate was 99.0% for these patients. The prosthesis survival rate was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this prospective study of full-arch maxillary immediate loading suggests that this protocol is suitable for most patients in need of full maxillary implant reconstruction. The protocol, as shown in this study, is highly successful in providing a lasting state of osseointegration as the foundation for long-term stability of screw-retained fixed prostheses.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".