Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study
Identifieur interne : 002E77 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 002E76; suivant : 002E78Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study
Auteurs : Ignace Naert ; George Koutsikakis ; Joke Duyck ; Marc Quirynen ; Reinhilde Jacobs ; Daniel Van SteenbergheSource :
- Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research [ 1523-0899 ] ; 2000-10.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Absolute failure, Abutment, Abutment connection, Biological factors, Bone level, Bone level changes, Bone loss, Branemark system, Catholic university, Central incisor, Clinical implant dentistry, Consecutive patients, Dent, Dentistry, Early failures, Failures number, First year, Healing period, High predictability, Implant, Implant failure, Implant installation, Implant length, Incisor, Jemt, Large number, Last visit, Longitudinal character, Lower jaws, Marginal bone level, Marginal bone loss, Maxillofac, Molar, Molar right, Multicenter, Nobel biocare, Oral maxillofac implants, Osseointegrated, Osseointegrated implants, Other studies, Patient number, Posterior sites, Preliminary report, Present study, Proportional hazards model, Prospective study, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Regression analysis, Restoration, Restoration failures, Retrospective, Retrospective study, Sites molars, Success function, Success rate, Survival function, Survival rate, Thread profile, Total patients.
- Teeft :
- Absolute failure, Abutment, Abutment connection, Biological factors, Bone level, Bone level changes, Bone loss, Branemark system, Catholic university, Central incisor, Clinical implant dentistry, Consecutive patients, Dent, Dentistry, Early failures, Failures number, First year, Healing period, High predictability, Implant, Implant failure, Implant installation, Implant length, Incisor, Jemt, Large number, Last visit, Longitudinal character, Lower jaws, Marginal bone level, Marginal bone loss, Maxillofac, Molar, Molar right, Multicenter, Nobel biocare, Oral maxillofac implants, Osseointegrated, Osseointegrated implants, Other studies, Patient number, Posterior sites, Preliminary report, Present study, Proportional hazards model, Prospective study, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Regression analysis, Restoration, Restoration failures, Retrospective, Retrospective study, Sites molars, Success function, Success rate, Survival function, Survival rate, Thread profile, Total patients.
Abstract
Background: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation. Purpose: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations. Materials and Methods: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999. Results: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years. Conclusions: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700BLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title><author><name sortKey="Naert, Ignace" sort="Naert, Ignace" uniqKey="Naert I" first="Ignace" last="Naert">Ignace Naert</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Koutsikakis, George" sort="Koutsikakis, George" uniqKey="Koutsikakis G" first="George" last="Koutsikakis">George Koutsikakis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duyck, Joke" sort="Duyck, Joke" uniqKey="Duyck J" first="Joke" last="Duyck">Joke Duyck</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, Marc" sort="Quirynen, Marc" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="Marc" last="Quirynen">Marc Quirynen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Jacobs, Reinhilde" sort="Jacobs, Reinhilde" uniqKey="Jacobs R" first="Reinhilde" last="Jacobs">Reinhilde Jacobs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" sort="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="Daniel" last="Van Steenberghe">Daniel Van Steenberghe</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B</idno><date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002E77</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">002E77</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title><author><name sortKey="Naert, Ignace" sort="Naert, Ignace" uniqKey="Naert I" first="Ignace" last="Naert">Ignace Naert</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Koutsikakis, George" sort="Koutsikakis, George" uniqKey="Koutsikakis G" first="George" last="Koutsikakis">George Koutsikakis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duyck, Joke" sort="Duyck, Joke" uniqKey="Duyck J" first="Joke" last="Duyck">Joke Duyck</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, Marc" sort="Quirynen, Marc" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="Marc" last="Quirynen">Marc Quirynen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Jacobs, Reinhilde" sort="Jacobs, Reinhilde" uniqKey="Jacobs R" first="Reinhilde" last="Jacobs">Reinhilde Jacobs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" sort="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="Daniel" last="Van Steenberghe">Daniel Van Steenberghe</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY RELATED RESEARCH</title><idno type="ISSN">1523-0899</idno><idno type="eISSN">1708-8208</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="209">209</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="218">218</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">10</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-10">2000-10</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1523-0899</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1523-0899</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Absolute failure</term><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment connection</term><term>Biological factors</term><term>Bone level</term><term>Bone level changes</term><term>Bone loss</term><term>Branemark system</term><term>Catholic university</term><term>Central incisor</term><term>Clinical implant dentistry</term><term>Consecutive patients</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Early failures</term><term>Failures number</term><term>First year</term><term>Healing period</term><term>High predictability</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant failure</term><term>Implant installation</term><term>Implant length</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Jemt</term><term>Large number</term><term>Last visit</term><term>Longitudinal character</term><term>Lower jaws</term><term>Marginal bone level</term><term>Marginal bone loss</term><term>Maxillofac</term><term>Molar</term><term>Molar right</term><term>Multicenter</term><term>Nobel biocare</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegrated implants</term><term>Other studies</term><term>Patient number</term><term>Posterior sites</term><term>Preliminary report</term><term>Present study</term><term>Proportional hazards model</term><term>Prospective study</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Regression analysis</term><term>Restoration</term><term>Restoration failures</term><term>Retrospective</term><term>Retrospective study</term><term>Sites molars</term><term>Success function</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Survival function</term><term>Survival rate</term><term>Thread profile</term><term>Total patients</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Absolute failure</term><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment connection</term><term>Biological factors</term><term>Bone level</term><term>Bone level changes</term><term>Bone loss</term><term>Branemark system</term><term>Catholic university</term><term>Central incisor</term><term>Clinical implant dentistry</term><term>Consecutive patients</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Early failures</term><term>Failures number</term><term>First year</term><term>Healing period</term><term>High predictability</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant failure</term><term>Implant installation</term><term>Implant length</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Jemt</term><term>Large number</term><term>Last visit</term><term>Longitudinal character</term><term>Lower jaws</term><term>Marginal bone level</term><term>Marginal bone loss</term><term>Maxillofac</term><term>Molar</term><term>Molar right</term><term>Multicenter</term><term>Nobel biocare</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegrated implants</term><term>Other studies</term><term>Patient number</term><term>Posterior sites</term><term>Preliminary report</term><term>Present study</term><term>Proportional hazards model</term><term>Prospective study</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Regression analysis</term><term>Restoration</term><term>Restoration failures</term><term>Retrospective</term><term>Retrospective study</term><term>Sites molars</term><term>Success function</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Survival function</term><term>Survival rate</term><term>Thread profile</term><term>Total patients</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Background: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation. Purpose: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations. Materials and Methods: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999. Results: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years. Conclusions: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>osseointegrated</json:string><json:string>abutment</json:string><json:string>maxillofac</json:string><json:string>prosthetic</json:string><json:string>oral maxillofac implants</json:string><json:string>abutment connection</json:string><json:string>multicenter</json:string><json:string>osseointegrated implants</json:string><json:string>prosthet</json:string><json:string>incisor</json:string><json:string>jemt</json:string><json:string>prosthet dent</json:string><json:string>lower jaws</json:string><json:string>dentistry</json:string><json:string>prosthetic dentistry</json:string><json:string>marginal bone level</json:string><json:string>retrospective study</json:string><json:string>molar</json:string><json:string>success rate</json:string><json:string>present study</json:string><json:string>catholic university</json:string><json:string>bone level</json:string><json:string>survival rate</json:string><json:string>clinical implant dentistry</json:string><json:string>marginal bone loss</json:string><json:string>retrospective</json:string><json:string>implant installation</json:string><json:string>large number</json:string><json:string>survival function</json:string><json:string>bone loss</json:string><json:string>implant length</json:string><json:string>thread profile</json:string><json:string>regression analysis</json:string><json:string>restoration</json:string><json:string>other studies</json:string><json:string>restoration failures</json:string><json:string>first year</json:string><json:string>longitudinal character</json:string><json:string>failures number</json:string><json:string>patient number</json:string><json:string>total patients</json:string><json:string>success function</json:string><json:string>proportional hazards model</json:string><json:string>central incisor</json:string><json:string>early failures</json:string><json:string>last visit</json:string><json:string>bone level changes</json:string><json:string>absolute failure</json:string><json:string>molar right</json:string><json:string>sites molars</json:string><json:string>nobel biocare</json:string><json:string>branemark system</json:string><json:string>consecutive patients</json:string><json:string>high predictability</json:string><json:string>healing period</json:string><json:string>biological factors</json:string><json:string>posterior sites</json:string><json:string>preliminary report</json:string><json:string>prospective study</json:string><json:string>implant failure</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Ignace Naert DDS, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</json:string><json:string>E-mail: lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>George Koutsikakis DDS</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Joke Duyck DDS, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Marc Quirynen DDS, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Reinhilde Jacobs DDS, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Daniel van Steenberghe MD, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>dental implants</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>marginal bone loss</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>partial edentulism</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>prognosis</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>single‐tooth restoration</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>success</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>CID209</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-TDDB41HX-2</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Background: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation. Purpose: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations. Materials and Methods: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999. Results: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years. Conclusions: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.392</score><pdfWordCount>4052</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>26722</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>10</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>576 x 791.759 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>195</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1263</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>6</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title><pmid><json:string>11359280</json:string></pmid><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8208</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>1523-0899</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1708-8208</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>CID</json:string></publisherId><volume>2</volume><issue>4</issue><pages><first>209</first><last>218</last><total>10</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2000</json:string><json:string>1999</json:string><json:string>1988</json:string><json:string>From November 1986 to June 1998</json:string><json:string>between November 1986 and June 1998</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>Related Research, Volume</json:string><json:string>Department of Periodontology</json:string><json:string>Catholic University</json:string><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry of the University Hospitals</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Marc Quirynen</json:string><json:string>Daniel van Steenberghe</json:string><json:string>Number</json:string><json:string>Time Interval</json:string><json:string>The</json:string><json:string>Esposito</json:string><json:string>Lindhe</json:string><json:string>Albrektsson</json:string><json:string>George Koutsikakis</json:string><json:string>Implants</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Germany</json:string><json:string>Japan</json:string><json:string>Tokyo</json:string><json:string>Leuven</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>January 1, 1998</json:string><json:string>June 1999</json:string><json:string>Malevez et al, 199632</json:string><json:string>Scheller et al, 199834</json:string><json:string>Haas et al, 19954</json:string><json:string>Bdshi et al, 199631</json:string><json:string>Walther et al, 199633</json:string><json:string>Jemt et al, 199126</json:string><json:string>Schwarts-Arad et al</json:string><json:string>Ekfeldt et al, 199427</json:string><json:string>Anderson et al, 1995</json:string><json:string>De Wijs et al, 19946</json:string><json:string>Palmer et al, 19975</json:string><json:string>Becker and Becker, 199529</json:string><json:string>Engquist et al, 199530</json:string><json:string>Polizzi et al, 199936</json:string><json:string>Kemppainen et al, 199737</json:string><json:string>Henry et al, 199623</json:string><json:string>Parein et al, 19972</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-TDDB41HX-2</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - General Dentistry</json:string><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - Oral Surgery</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>2000</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2000</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x</json:string></doi><id>5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-10"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title><author xml:id="author-0000" role="corresp"><persName><forename type="first">Ignace</forename><surname>Naert</surname><roleName type="degree">DDS, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation><affiliation>Reprint requests: Ignace Naert, DDS, PhD, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7, B‐3000 Leuven, Belgium; e‐mail: lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">George</forename><surname>Koutsikakis</surname><roleName type="degree">DDS</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Joke</forename><surname>Duyck</surname><roleName type="degree">DDS, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Marc</forename><surname>Quirynen</surname><roleName type="degree">DDS, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">Reinhilde</forename><surname>Jacobs</surname><roleName type="degree">DDS, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0005"><persName><forename type="first">Daniel</forename><surname>Steenberghe</surname><roleName type="degree">MD, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-TDDB41HX-2</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x</idno><idno type="unit">CID209</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:CID.CID209.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY RELATED RESEARCH</title><idno type="pISSN">1523-0899</idno><idno type="eISSN">1708-8208</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8208</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/cid.2000.2.issue-4</idno><idno type="product">CID</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="209">209</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="218">218</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">10</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-10"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><head>ABSTRACT</head><p>
<hi rend="italic">Background</hi>: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation.</p><p>
<hi rend="italic">Purpose</hi>: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations.</p><p>
<hi rend="italic">Materials and Methods</hi>: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999.</p><p>
<hi rend="italic">Results</hi>: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years.</p><p>
<hi rend="italic">Conclusions</hi>: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">dental implants</term><term xml:id="k2">marginal bone loss</term><term xml:id="k3">partial edentulism</term><term xml:id="k4">prognosis</term><term xml:id="k5">single‐tooth restoration</term><term xml:id="k6">success</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8208</doi><issn type="print">1523-0899</issn><issn type="electronic">1708-8208</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CID"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY RELATED RESEARCH">Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="10004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/cid.2000.2.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="2">2</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2000-10">October 2000</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0020900" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CID209"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="10"></count></countGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2007-04-10"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2007-04-10"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:HeaderRef result:HeaderRef" date="2010-03-13"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-16"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="209">209</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="218">218</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Reprint requests: Ignace Naert, DDS, PhD, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7, B‐3000 Leuven, Belgium; e‐mail: <email>lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CID.CID209.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="referenceTotal" number="39"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="7"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>Ignace</givenNames><familyName>Naert</familyName><degrees>DDS, PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>George</givenNames><familyName>Koutsikakis</familyName><degrees>DDS</degrees></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Joke</givenNames><familyName>Duyck</familyName><degrees>DDS, PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Marc</givenNames><familyName>Quirynen</familyName><degrees>DDS, PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr5" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Reinhilde</givenNames><familyName>Jacobs</familyName><degrees>DDS, PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr6" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Daniel</givenNames><familyNamePrefix>van</familyNamePrefix><familyName>Steenberghe</familyName><degrees>MD, PhD</degrees></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="BE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="BE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">dental implants</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">marginal bone loss</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">partial edentulism</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">prognosis</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">single‐tooth restoration</keyword><keyword xml:id="k6">success</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">ABSTRACT</title><p> <i>Background</i>: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation.</p><p> <i>Purpose</i>: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations.</p><p> <i>Materials and Methods</i>: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999.</p><p> <i>Results</i>: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years.</p><p> <i>Conclusions</i>: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ignace</namePart><namePart type="family">Naert</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: lgnace.Naert@med.kuleuven.ac.be</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">George</namePart><namePart type="family">Koutsikakis</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS</namePart><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Joke</namePart><namePart type="family">Duyck</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium and</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Marc</namePart><namePart type="family">Quirynen</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Reinhilde</namePart><namePart type="family">Jacobs</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Daniel</namePart><namePart type="family">van Steenberghe</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2000-10</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2000</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="references">39</extent><extent unit="linksCrossRef">7</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Background: The replacement of a single tooth or several teeth by means of single‐implant restorations is an increasingly used method that needs long‐term validation. Purpose: The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of single‐implant restorations by means of fixed restorations and to define the prognosis through marginal bone level estimations. Materials and Methods: From November 1986 to June 1998, 270 Brånemark implants (215 in the upper jaw) were installed in 219 patients (106 males). Both anterior and posterior sites were involved. Of the 263 single restorations, 28 were placed in private dental offices. The patients were followed until June 1999. Results: Twelve implants failed before or at abutment connection or within 6 months afterward. Only four implants failed later. The cumulative success rates were 93% for the implants and 96.5% for the restorations over a period of 11 years. The marginal bone loss during the first 6 months after abutment connection reached 0.71 mm and then dropped to 0.036 mm annually over a period of 10 years. Conclusions: Single‐implant restorations (Brånemark System) are a reliable treatment with a good long‐term prognosis. Failures were concentrated during the healing period and early loading phase.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>dental implants</topic><topic>marginal bone loss</topic><topic>partial edentulism</topic><topic>prognosis</topic><topic>single‐tooth restoration</topic><topic>success</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">1523-0899</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1708-8208</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8208</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CID</identifier><part><date>2000</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>2</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>209</start><end>218</end><total>10</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-TDDB41HX-2</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00119.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CID209</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002E77 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002E77 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:5F3CACABE565DE6C8D75DCF72DC8D6FA665A700B
|texte= Biologie Outcome of Single‐Implant Restorations as Tooth Replacements: A Long‐term Follow‐up Study
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |