Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.
Identifieur interne : 000947 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 000946; suivant : 000948Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.
Auteurs : J. Zweers ; A. Van Doornik ; E A H. Hogendorf ; M. Quirynen ; G A Van Der WeijdenSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 1600-0501 ] ; 2015.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alveolar Bone Loss (diagnostic imaging), Alveolar Bone Loss (etiology), Dental Implantation, Endosseous (instrumentation), Dental Implants (adverse effects), Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported (instrumentation), Denture Retention (adverse effects), Denture Retention (instrumentation), Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous (diagnostic imaging), Jaw, Edentulous (surgery), Male, Mandible (diagnostic imaging), Mandible (surgery), Middle Aged, Osseointegration, Patient Satisfaction, Retrospective Studies, Titanium.
- MESH :
- chemical , adverse effects : Dental Implants.
- adverse effects : Denture Retention.
- diagnostic imaging : Alveolar Bone Loss, Jaw, Edentulous, Mandible.
- etiology : Alveolar Bone Loss.
- instrumentation : Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Denture Retention.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous, Mandible.
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dental Prosthesis Design, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Osseointegration, Patient Satisfaction, Retrospective Studies, Titanium.
Abstract
Narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) are used in severely resorbed mandibles. The reduced implant diameter means a reduction in the total contact surface between the implant and bone. The question arises whether the implant can be sufficiently osseointegrated to withstand loading forces. If not, marginal bone loss can result from overload. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare clinical and radiographic measurements and patient satisfaction of NDIs with those of regular-diameter implants (RDIs) placed in edentulous patients to support an overdenture via either a ball or a locator connection.
DOI: 10.1111/clr.12309
PubMed: 24372952
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:24372952Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.</title><author><name sortKey="Zweers, J" sort="Zweers, J" uniqKey="Zweers J" first="J" last="Zweers">J. Zweers</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, ACTA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Doornik, A" sort="Van Doornik, A" uniqKey="Van Doornik A" first="A" last="Van Doornik">A. Van Doornik</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hogendorf, E A H" sort="Hogendorf, E A H" uniqKey="Hogendorf E" first="E A H" last="Hogendorf">E A H. Hogendorf</name></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, M" sort="Quirynen, M" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="M" last="Quirynen">M. Quirynen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Van Der Weijden, G A" sort="Van Der Weijden, G A" uniqKey="Van Der Weijden G" first="G A" last="Van Der Weijden">G A Van Der Weijden</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2015">2015</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:24372952</idno><idno type="pmid">24372952</idno><idno type="doi">10.1111/clr.12309</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">000947</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000947</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.</title><author><name sortKey="Zweers, J" sort="Zweers, J" uniqKey="Zweers J" first="J" last="Zweers">J. Zweers</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, ACTA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Doornik, A" sort="Van Doornik, A" uniqKey="Van Doornik A" first="A" last="Van Doornik">A. Van Doornik</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hogendorf, E A H" sort="Hogendorf, E A H" uniqKey="Hogendorf E" first="E A H" last="Hogendorf">E A H. Hogendorf</name></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, M" sort="Quirynen, M" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="M" last="Quirynen">M. Quirynen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Van Der Weijden, G A" sort="Van Der Weijden, G A" uniqKey="Van Der Weijden G" first="G A" last="Van Der Weijden">G A Van Der Weijden</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Clinical oral implants research</title><idno type="eISSN">1600-0501</idno><imprint><date when="2015" type="published">2015</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Alveolar Bone Loss (diagnostic imaging)</term><term>Alveolar Bone Loss (etiology)</term><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous (instrumentation)</term><term>Dental Implants (adverse effects)</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported (instrumentation)</term><term>Denture Retention (adverse effects)</term><term>Denture Retention (instrumentation)</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (diagnostic imaging)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (surgery)</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible (diagnostic imaging)</term><term>Mandible (surgery)</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Retrospective Studies</term><term>Titanium</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" qualifier="adverse effects" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="adverse effects" xml:lang="en"><term>Denture Retention</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="diagnostic imaging" xml:lang="en"><term>Alveolar Bone Loss</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term><term>Mandible</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="etiology" xml:lang="en"><term>Alveolar Bone Loss</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="instrumentation" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Denture Retention</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="surgery" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term><term>Mandible</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Male</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Retrospective Studies</term><term>Titanium</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) are used in severely resorbed mandibles. The reduced implant diameter means a reduction in the total contact surface between the implant and bone. The question arises whether the implant can be sufficiently osseointegrated to withstand loading forces. If not, marginal bone loss can result from overload. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare clinical and radiographic measurements and patient satisfaction of NDIs with those of regular-diameter implants (RDIs) placed in edentulous patients to support an overdenture via either a ball or a locator connection.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">24372952</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2016</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>13</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2016</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>30</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print-Electronic"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1600-0501</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>26</Volume><Issue>2</Issue><PubDate><Year>2015</Year><Month>Feb</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Clinical oral implants research</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Clin Oral Implants Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>149-56</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1111/clr.12309</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText Label="OBJECTIVES" NlmCategory="OBJECTIVE">Narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) are used in severely resorbed mandibles. The reduced implant diameter means a reduction in the total contact surface between the implant and bone. The question arises whether the implant can be sufficiently osseointegrated to withstand loading forces. If not, marginal bone loss can result from overload. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare clinical and radiographic measurements and patient satisfaction of NDIs with those of regular-diameter implants (RDIs) placed in edentulous patients to support an overdenture via either a ball or a locator connection.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="MATERIAL AND METHODS" NlmCategory="METHODS">Retrospectively over a 7-year period, a total 119 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were selected for this study. The patients received two 3.3- or 4.1-mm-diameter standard titanium implants in the mandible to support an overdenture. At maintenance examinations after 1 and 3 years, clinical peri-implant and prosthetic conditions, marginal bone (MB) and patient satisfaction were investigated.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="RESULTS" NlmCategory="RESULTS">None of the 238 implants were lost during the 3-year follow-up period. Overall MB loss was statistically higher in the NDI group when compared with the RDI group. At the site level, a greater MB loss was observed at the distal side of both implant types. Implants with a locator showed significantly greater MB loss (0.38 mm) compared with the implants with a ball attachment (0.14 mm) over the two-year evaluation period (P = 0.006). Patient satisfaction significantly favoured the NDI (8.3) and the locator attachment (8.6).</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="CONCLUSIONS" NlmCategory="CONCLUSIONS">The results suggest that during the first three years after implantation, NDIs were associated with more marginal bone loss compared with RDIs. Regardless of implant diameter, the locator attachment showed more marginal bone loss over time compared with the ball attachment.</AbstractText><CopyrightInformation>© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</CopyrightInformation></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Zweers</LastName><ForeName>J</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Periodontology, ACTA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>van Doornik</LastName><ForeName>A</ForeName><Initials>A</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Hogendorf</LastName><ForeName>E A H</ForeName><Initials>EA</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Quirynen</LastName><ForeName>M</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Van der Weijden</LastName><ForeName>G A</ForeName><Initials>GA</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D013485">Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList><ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2013</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>20</Day></ArticleDate></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>Denmark</Country><MedlineTA>Clin Oral Implants Res</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>9105713</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0905-7161</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance></Chemical><Chemical><RegistryNumber>D1JT611TNE</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D014025">Titanium</NameOfSubstance></Chemical></ChemicalList><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000328" MajorTopicYN="N">Adult</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000368" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000369" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged, 80 and over</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016301" MajorTopicYN="N">Alveolar Bone Loss</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000000981" MajorTopicYN="Y">diagnostic imaging</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000209" MajorTopicYN="N">etiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003758" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implantation, Endosseous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="Y">instrumentation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implants</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000009" MajorTopicYN="Y">adverse effects</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017267" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="Y">instrumentation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003781" MajorTopicYN="N">Denture Retention</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000009" MajorTopicYN="N">adverse effects</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="Y">instrumentation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005500" MajorTopicYN="N">Follow-Up Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000000981" MajorTopicYN="N">diagnostic imaging</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="N">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008334" MajorTopicYN="N">Mandible</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000000981" MajorTopicYN="N">diagnostic imaging</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="N">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016348" MajorTopicYN="N">Osseointegration</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017060" MajorTopicYN="N">Patient Satisfaction</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D012189" MajorTopicYN="N">Retrospective Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D014025" MajorTopicYN="N">Titanium</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList><KeywordList Owner="NOTNLM"><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">bone resorption</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">mandible</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">narrow-diameter dental implants</Keyword><Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">overdenture</Keyword></KeywordList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="accepted"><Year>2013</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>04</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2013</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>31</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2014</Year><Month>1</Month><Day>1</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2016</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>15</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">24372952</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1111/clr.12309</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV1/Data/PubMed/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000947 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000947 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV1
|flux= PubMed
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:24372952
|texte= Clinical and radiographic evaluation of narrow- vs. regular-diameter dental implants: a 3-year follow-up. A retrospective study.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:24372952" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |