One‐Year Prospective Evaluation of the Early Loading of Unsplinted Conical Brånemark Fixtures with Mandibular Overdentures Immediately following Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prospective evaluation of the early loading of unsplinted Brånemark implants with mandibular overdentures opposing conventional dentures is not evident in the implant-related literature. PURPOSE: To clinically evaluate progressive and early loading of 20 unsplinted conical Brånemark implants in edentulous mandibles with overdentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten edentulous patients all had two conical Brånemark implants placed in the anterior mandible with mandatory primary stability with bicortical anchorage. Ball abutment connection was performed simultaneously. Previously constructed conventional mandibular dentures were temporarily relined with tissue conditioner postoperatively and worn with moderation for the first 2 weeks to allow progressive loading. Early loading of the implants followed after 2 weeks, with inclusion of the respective matrices in the mandibular dentures, using a definitive reline procedure. RESULTS: All patients successfully functioned with their mandibular implant overdentures from 2 to 52 weeks postoperatively. Mean marginal bone loss was within established criteria for success: 0.22 mm (SD = 0.48 mm) mesially and 0.30 mm (SD = 0.39 mm) distally on the conical implants. Mobility tests using the Periotest instrument became more negative, although not at statistically significant levels. Difficulties in the management of the peri-implant mucosa between surgery and loading at 2 weeks were observed in 40% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary 1-year results show that successful early loading of unsplinted conical Brånemark implants with mandibular overdentures is possible.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".