Analysis of crestal bone loss around single piece ball attachment implant placed bilaterally in canine region and wear of O‐ring in implant supported overdenture: Three year follow‐up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Single piece implant in fixed prosthesis is widely been evaluated, however, long term evaluation of crestal bone loss and the wear of O-ring in single piece ball attachment implant supported overdenture is yet to be evaluated PURPOSE: The present article evaluates the crestal bone loss around single piece ball attachment implants placed bilaterally in the canine region and the wear of O-ring in implant supported overdenture over a period of three years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve completely edentulous patients between the age group of 55-65 years were selected. Two 3.3 mm × 13 mm myriad snap fit implants were placed in the mandibular interforaminal region. All the implants were conventionally loaded at three months after surgical placement. Intra-oral periapical radiographs were made and crestal bone loss was measured at the end of one year and three years. The elasticity and wear of O-Ring was assessed after three years of usage. RESULTS: The crestal bone loss showed no significant difference between the first and third year after implant placement. The mean bone loss at the end of third year was 1.5 mm. Analysis of O-ring for change in the elasticity showed reduction in displacement and a significant increase in maximum displacement and elongation. The area of O-ring and yield stress did not show any changes from the standard value. Compression set damage was observed in the O-ring at the end of three years. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that the bilateral single piece implant supported overdenture has a success rate equivalent to the two piece implant supported overdenture and is a viable treatment option.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".