Simplified Methods of Implant Treatment in the Edentulous Lower Jaw. A Controlled Prospective Study. Part I: One‐Stage versus Two‐Stage Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The original protocol for Brånemark System implants in the mandible was a two-stage procedure with 3 months healing time. With five or six implants and a cast framework of gold, the treatment is rather expensive, and simplified methods would be desirable. PURPOSE: The goal of this controlled serial study was to investigate the outcome of a simplified procedure with one-stage surgery, four Brånemark implants, shortened healing time, and a new titanium-acrylic fixed full prosthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-two patients were treated in three different groups at two specialist centers. All patients were provided with four implants, loaded with a Procera All-in-One bridge (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) after 12 weeks. In group A (n = 30), one-stage surgery was combined with two-piece implants. In group B (n = 30), the control group, two-stage surgery and two-piece implants were used. In group C (n = 22), one-stage surgery was combined with one-piece implants. Marginal bone level was rated from radiographs at implant insertion, at baseline, and after 1 year. RESULTS: The survival rate after 1 year for group A was 93.3%; group B, 97.5%; and group C, 93.2%. The differences were not statistically significant. Between fixture insertion and baseline, the average bone loss for group A was 1.2 mm; group B, 1.3 mm; and group C, 1.3 mm. No complications in the form of bridge loosening or acrylic fractures were recorded during the first year. CONCLUSIONS: The survival rates and the marginal bone changes did not differ significantly between the one-stage groups and the control group. The survival rate and the marginal bone changes were similar for one-piece and two-piece implants. Four implants were sufficient to support full fixed prostheses in the mandibles. The Procera All-in-One bridges proved to be of high quality, and no complications were experienced. key words: endosseous implants, nonsubmerged implants, one-piece implants, prospective clinical study, submerged implants
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".