Immediate Occlusal Loading of Single Lower Molars Using Brånemark System® Wide‐Platform TiUnite™ Implants: An Interim Report of a Prospective Open‐Ended Clinical Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: First and second molars in the lower jaw are the most commonly missing teeth. As in other jaw regions with tooth loss, implant therapy is an attractive concept. Owing to the wide dimension of the molar teeth, wide implants seem to be a natural choice. However, wide implants in posterior mandibular regions sometimes present a problem. As an oxidized surface seems to facilitate implant integration and to result in a stronger fixation to bone, it was hypothesized that this surface would improve the performance of wide implants in posterior mandibles. As high initial stability most often is achieved in this region, it was hypothesized that the load per se is not a problem. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study is to evaluate immediate loading of Brånemark System TiUnite Wide-Platform implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) supporting single molar crowns in the lower jaw. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study includes 44 patients treated in three separate private dental offices between March 2001 and June 2002. A total of 50 implants were placed, and all implants have passed the 6-month follow-up; 24 have been followed up for 1 year. All implants were provided with provisional crowns in centric occlusion at the time of surgery. RESULTS: No implant has been lost. Marginal bone levels were found in accordance with normal biologic width requirements. Resonance frequency analysis showed high and consistent implant stability. No biomechanical problems were found associated with the use of wide implants, and the potential physiologic problem in dense mandibular bone was eliminated. CONCLUSION: Although limited by being a short-term study, the result encourages immediate loading of single Brånemark System TiUnite Wide-Platform implants placed in the molar regions in the lower jaw.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".