Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics · 2006
Immediate placement of implants in periapical infected sites: a prospective randomized study in 50 patients.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lindeboom Jérôme A H, Tjiook Yang, Kroon Frans H M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical success when implants are placed in chronic periapical infected sites.
STUDY DESIGN: Fifty patients (25 females, 25 males, mean age 39.7 +/- 14.5 years) were included in this prospective controlled study. After randomization, 25 Frialit-2 Synchro implants were immediately placed (IP) after extraction, and 25 Frialit-2 Synchro implants were placed after a 3-month healing period (DP). Thirty-two implants were placed in the anterior maxilla and 18 implants were placed in the premolar region. Implant survival, mean Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values, gingival aesthetics, radiographic bone loss, and microbiologic characteristics of periapical lesions were evaluated for both groups.
RESULTS: Overall, 2 implants belonging to the IP group were lost, resulting in a survival rate of 92% for IP implants versus 100% for DP implants. Mean ISQ, gingival aesthetics and radiographic bone resorption, and periapical cultures were not significantly different with the IP and DP implants.
CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implant placement in chronic periapical lesions may be indicated.
STUDY DESIGN: Fifty patients (25 females, 25 males, mean age 39.7 +/- 14.5 years) were included in this prospective controlled study. After randomization, 25 Frialit-2 Synchro implants were immediately placed (IP) after extraction, and 25 Frialit-2 Synchro implants were placed after a 3-month healing period (DP). Thirty-two implants were placed in the anterior maxilla and 18 implants were placed in the premolar region. Implant survival, mean Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values, gingival aesthetics, radiographic bone loss, and microbiologic characteristics of periapical lesions were evaluated for both groups.
RESULTS: Overall, 2 implants belonging to the IP group were lost, resulting in a survival rate of 92% for IP implants versus 100% for DP implants. Mean ISQ, gingival aesthetics and radiographic bone resorption, and periapical cultures were not significantly different with the IP and DP implants.
CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implant placement in chronic periapical lesions may be indicated.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAgedAlveolar Bone LossBacteria, AnaerobicBone TransplantationChronic DiseaseDental Implantation, EndosseousDental Implants, Single-ToothDental Restoration FailureFemaleGingival RecessionHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeriapical PeriodontitisProspective StudiesRadiographyStatistics, NonparametricTime FactorsTooth SocketTreatment Outcome