A Retrospective Study on Immediate Placement of Neoss Implants with Early Loading of Full‐Arch Bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Full-arch clearances of compromised teeth and placement of implant-supported prostheses is one solution for the prosthetic rehabilitation of partially dentate patients. PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate treatment outcomes after full clearance, immediate placement, and early loading of full-arch fixed bridges. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-five patients subjected to full clearance and placement of 284 Neoss implants (Bimodal™ and Proactive™, Neoss Ltd, Harrogate, UK) in 29 edentulous maxillae and 26 mandibles for early loading (1 to 3 days) of a provisional full-arch bridge were retrospectively evaluated after 1 to 6 years of loading. Osstell™ measurements (Osstell AB, Göteborg, Sweden) were taken at placement and after 3 to 9 months when the provisional bridge was replaced with a permanent one. Marginal bone levels were measured in intraoral radiographs. RESULTS: All patients (100%) wore a fixed bridge at the time of finalizing the study. A total of 18 failures (6.3%) were encountered during the follow-up, giving an overall cumulative survival rate of 93.7%. All failures occurred in the maxilla (10.6%), and no implants were lost in the mandible. More Bimodal™ (9.0%) than Proactive™ (4.1%) implants failed. Failing implants showed a significantly lower mean primary stability than successful ones (p = .015). Failed cases showed a significantly lower average ISQ for all implants (p = .015) and a marked decrease to the second registration, while successful cases showed and maintained high ISQs. The average bone loss after 1 year was 0.8 ± 0.5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Full-arch clearance of severely diseased teeth followed by immediate placement of Neoss implants, early loading with provisional full-arch bridges, and subsequent permanent bridges is a possible treatment modality for partially dentate patients. Caution with this approach is recommended for the maxilla, as opposed to the mandible.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".