MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Immediate Function of Brånemark Implants in the Esthetic Zone: A Retrospective Clinical Study with 6 Months to 4 Years of Follow‐up

2000· article· en· W2172259397 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMaxillaImplantDentistryProsthesisOcclusionDental prosthesisRetrospective cohort studyOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immediate implant function is a psychological benefit for the patient and makes a substantial reduction in treatment cost possible. Currently, immediate function using Brånemark implants has become an accepted alternative for complete-arch fixed restorations in mandibles and for overdenture support for some other screw-shaped implants. Clinical documentation is lacking for other applications. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate a concept for immediate function of Brånemark implants supporting fixed prosthesis in the esthetic regions of the jaws. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective clinical study included 49 consecutively treated patients with 94 implants supporting 54 fixed prostheses, all in esthetically critical regions: 23 of the prostheses were bridges, 14 in maxillae and 9 in mandibles; 31 of the prostheses were crowns, 22 in maxillae and 9 in mandibles. At surgery, the implant platform was positioned above the surrounding bone level and bicortical anchorage was the goal whenever possible. The minimum insertion torque for accepting the implant for immediate function was 32 Ncm. Provisional implant-supported prostheses without occlusal contacts were delivered at time of surgery, and final prostheses with normal occlusion were delivered 5 months later. RESULTS: Eighty-five of the implants (90%) have passed the 1-year and 40 (43%) the 2-year follow-ups, respectively. Two implants failed in one patient before the 6-month follow-up, and another two implants between the 6-month and the 1-year follow-up, in two other patients, giving a cumulative survival rate of 96%. The average bone resorption was 0.8 mm after the first year as evaluated from 35 patients with readable radiographs. The failed implants were replaced after 3 to 4 months with immediate function; these were successful in all cases (not included in this study). The number of complications was small and did not differ in character from those normally encountered at implant treatment using a conventional protocol. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative survival rate of 96% at 1 and 2 years indicates that immediate function of Brånemark implants used in the esthetic zone in both jaws can be a viable concept. All failures occurred in fresh extraction sites, and extra care is recommended to avoid situations with ongoing inflammation in these situations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.368 · 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