MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A 1‐Year Prospective Study on Co‐Axis® Implants Immediately Loaded with a Full Ceramic Crown

2011· article· en· W2102487608 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stefan Vandeweghe, Jan Cosyn, Eric Thevissen, L. Van Den Berghe, Hugo De Bruyn

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrown (dentistry)Soft tissueImplantDentistryMajor duodenal papillaBleeding on probingPremaxillaOrthodonticsMaxillaSurgeryPeriodontitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Co-Axis implant (Southern Implants, Irene, South Africa) has a 12-degree angle in the implant neck to overcome angulation problems. AIM: To examine bone loss, peri-implant health, and aesthetical outcome after 1-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen single implants were placed in 14 patients in the premaxilla and immediately loaded with a screw-retained full ceramic crown. Periapical radiographs and standardized photographs were taken to determine bone loss and soft tissue changes. Plaque and bleeding levels were assessed. Patients' satisfaction was measured using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 questionnaire. RESULTS: After 1 year, all implants survived and mean bone loss was 1.20 mm, with no significant changes after 6 months. Plaque levels were low and no significant changes were observed. Bleeding levels decreased during the initial 3 months, but were constant thereafter. Before final torqueing was performed after 6 months, four cases of screw loosening occurred. Also, one crown had a piece of porcelain chipped off. Patients reported an overall increase in well-being. A mean midfacial recession of 0.37 mm was observed. The mesial papilla showed a slight increase of 0.14 mm, while the distal papilla decreased 0.35 mm. CONCLUSION: With 100% survival and stable bone levels after 6 months, the Co-Axis implant showed a good clinical outcome when immediately loaded. The use of a full ceramic crown as a first and final restoration resulted in a good aesthetic outcome with few changes in papilla fill, although midfacial soft tissue was stable only after 1 year.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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