Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2012
One-year clinical and radiographic results with a novel hydrophilic titanium dental implant.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Degasperi Werner, Andersson Peter, Verrocchi Damiano, Sennerby Lars
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: New implant designs are continuously introduced to the market. It is important to evaluate and report on their clinical performance when used in everyday practice.
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel hydrophilic dental implant for 1 year.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 49 patients previously treated with 102 hydrophilic dental implants (Neoss Proactive, Neoss Ltd, Harrogate, UK) were retrospectively evaluated with regard to survival rate and marginal bone loss. Fifty-four implants were installed in maxillae and 48 in mandibles to replace single teeth (n = 21), to support partial bridges (n = 26), total maxillary bridges (n = 2), or mandibular overdentures (n = 2). The majority of patients (n = 37) had implants placed in healed sites without any adjunctive procedures. In 12 patients, implants were immediately placed in extraction sockets or in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation. All implant sites had been classified according to the Lekholm and Zarb index. Baseline and 1-year intraoral radiographs were used to calculate marginal bone levels and bone loss. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements had been taken at placement and after 3 to 4 months of healing
RESULTS: The implants became rapidly covered with blood at the first contact. One implant was lost, giving a cumulative survival rate (CSR) of 99.0% after 1 year. The marginal bone loss amounted to 0.7 ± 0.6 mm with 3.5% of the implants showing more than 2 mm of bone loss and no implant more than 3 mm bone loss after 1 year. The primary stability was found to be 72.7 ± 7.5 ISQ, which slightly increased to 73.6 ± 7.2 ISQ (NS) after 3 to 4 months of healing. The stability was significantly higher in the mandible than in the maxilla at placement and after healing.
CONCLUSION: In this limited clinical study, the use of a novel hydrophilic dental implant results in favorable short-term outcomes.
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel hydrophilic dental implant for 1 year.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 49 patients previously treated with 102 hydrophilic dental implants (Neoss Proactive, Neoss Ltd, Harrogate, UK) were retrospectively evaluated with regard to survival rate and marginal bone loss. Fifty-four implants were installed in maxillae and 48 in mandibles to replace single teeth (n = 21), to support partial bridges (n = 26), total maxillary bridges (n = 2), or mandibular overdentures (n = 2). The majority of patients (n = 37) had implants placed in healed sites without any adjunctive procedures. In 12 patients, implants were immediately placed in extraction sockets or in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation. All implant sites had been classified according to the Lekholm and Zarb index. Baseline and 1-year intraoral radiographs were used to calculate marginal bone levels and bone loss. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements had been taken at placement and after 3 to 4 months of healing
RESULTS: The implants became rapidly covered with blood at the first contact. One implant was lost, giving a cumulative survival rate (CSR) of 99.0% after 1 year. The marginal bone loss amounted to 0.7 ± 0.6 mm with 3.5% of the implants showing more than 2 mm of bone loss and no implant more than 3 mm bone loss after 1 year. The primary stability was found to be 72.7 ± 7.5 ISQ, which slightly increased to 73.6 ± 7.2 ISQ (NS) after 3 to 4 months of healing. The stability was significantly higher in the mandible than in the maxilla at placement and after healing.
CONCLUSION: In this limited clinical study, the use of a novel hydrophilic dental implant results in favorable short-term outcomes.