A Retrospective Study of Sintered Porous-Surfaced Dental Implants in Restoring the Edentulous Posterior Mandible: Up to 9 Years of Functioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival rate of sintered porous-surfaced implants placed in the edentulous posterior mandibles, in relation to implant length and diameter, crown-to-implant ratio, and types of prostheses, for a maximum of 9 years of functioning (mean: 55.8 months; range: 5-108 months). MATERIALS: The study group consisted of 43 partially edentulous patients who visited Catholic University Hospital of Daegu and 1 private dental clinic. A total of 122 sintered porous-surfaced implants--Endopore (Innova Life Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada)--were placed in the edentulous posterior mandibles. Two diameter sizes (4.1 and 5.0 mm) and 4 lengths (5.0, 7.0, 9.0, and 12.0 mm) were used. All implants were restored with fixed prostheses. One hundred three implants were splinted and 21 implants were nonsplinted. Panoramic views and periapical radiographs were taken at the time of the first, postoperative, crown placement, and following checkup visits. The survival rates of the implants in relation to length, diameter, crown-to-implant ratio, and types of prostheses were investigated. Statistical data were analyzed using SPSS Win.Ver 14.0 software with the χ² test. RESULTS: The survival rate of the 4.1-mm-diameter implants was 100% and 91.2% for the 5.0-mm-diameter implants. The survival rates of the implants of differing diameters were found to be statistically different (P = 0.005). The survival rates of both the 5.0-mm and 7.0-mm-length implants were 100%. The survival rate of the 9.0-mm-length implants was 97.9% and for the 12.0-mm-length implants was 95.1%. There was no statistical difference in survival rates for the differing lengths of implants. Of the 103 prostheses that were splinted, the survival rate was 98.0%. The survival rate of splinted prostheses was higher than that of the nonsplinted prostheses but was found to be not statistically different. There were no failed cases when the crown-to-implant ratio was <1.0. When the crown-to-implant ratio was between 1.0 and 1.4, the failure rate of the implants was 6.7%. No failure was recorded with the ratio range of 1.5 to 2.0. Relative to the crown-to-implant ratio of 1.0, the failure rates were statistically different (P = 0.048). CONCLUSION: The cumulative survival rate of the porous-surfaced implants placed in the edentulous posterior mandibles was 97.5%. Short porous-surfaced implants showed satisfactory results after a maximum of 9 years of functioning in the edentulous posterior mandibles.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".