A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results
Identifieur interne : 004875 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 004874; suivant : 004876A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results
Auteurs : Richard J. Lazzara ; Stephax S. Porter ; Tiziano Testori ; Jorge Galante ; Lars ZetterqvistSource :
- Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry [ 1496-4155 ] ; 1998-11.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abutment, Abutment connection, Bone density, Bone formation, Bone healing, Clinical dentistry, Clinical evidence, Clinical observations, Clinical performance, Contact osteogenesis, Contact values, Cumulative implant survival rate, Dental arch, Dental implants, Distance osteogenesis, Early implant loading, Esthetic dentistry, Fibrin clot, Fibrin network, Functional loading, Healing times, Higher contact, Histologic, Implant, Implant distribution, Implant integration, Implant mobility, Implant performance, Implant placement, Implant surface, Implant surfaces, Implant surgery, Implant survival, Loading osseotite, Machined, Machined surface, Machined surfaces, Multicenter, Nonintegrated implants, Osseotite, Osseotite implants, Osseotite surface, Osteogenic cells, Overdenture abutments, Palm beach gardens, Partial dentures, Preliminary results, Present study, Private practice, Profound contact, Prospective multicenter study, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic principles, Prosthetic procedures, Provisional restorations, Pure titanium implants, Rabbit femurs, Second molar, Surgical, Surgical protocol, Titanium, Titanium abutment, West palm beach.
- Teeft :
- Abutment, Abutment connection, Bone density, Bone formation, Bone healing, Clinical dentistry, Clinical evidence, Clinical observations, Clinical performance, Contact osteogenesis, Contact values, Cumulative implant survival rate, Dental arch, Dental implants, Distance osteogenesis, Early implant loading, Esthetic dentistry, Fibrin clot, Fibrin network, Functional loading, Healing times, Higher contact, Histologic, Implant, Implant distribution, Implant integration, Implant mobility, Implant performance, Implant placement, Implant surface, Implant surfaces, Implant surgery, Implant survival, Loading osseotite, Machined, Machined surface, Machined surfaces, Multicenter, Nonintegrated implants, Osseotite, Osseotite implants, Osseotite surface, Osteogenic cells, Overdenture abutments, Palm beach gardens, Partial dentures, Preliminary results, Present study, Private practice, Profound contact, Prospective multicenter study, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Prosthetic principles, Prosthetic procedures, Provisional restorations, Pure titanium implants, Rabbit femurs, Second molar, Surgical, Surgical protocol, Titanium, Titanium abutment, West palm beach.
Abstract
Abstract: Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
<author><name sortKey="Lazzara, Richard J" sort="Lazzara, Richard J" uniqKey="Lazzara R" first="Richard J." last="Lazzara">Richard J. Lazzara</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Porter, Stephax S" sort="Porter, Stephax S" uniqKey="Porter S" first="Stephax S." last="Porter">Stephax S. Porter</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Correspondence address: Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Testori, Tiziano" sort="Testori, Tiziano" uniqKey="Testori T" first="Tiziano" last="Testori">Tiziano Testori</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Galante, Jorge" sort="Galante, Jorge" uniqKey="Galante J" first="Jorge" last="Galante">Jorge Galante</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Zetterqvist, Lars" sort="Zetterqvist, Lars" uniqKey="Zetterqvist L" first="Lars" last="Zetterqvist">Lars Zetterqvist</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7</idno>
<date when="1998" year="1998">1998</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">004875</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">004875</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
<author><name sortKey="Lazzara, Richard J" sort="Lazzara, Richard J" uniqKey="Lazzara R" first="Richard J." last="Lazzara">Richard J. Lazzara</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Porter, Stephax S" sort="Porter, Stephax S" uniqKey="Porter S" first="Stephax S." last="Porter">Stephax S. Porter</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Correspondence address: Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Testori, Tiziano" sort="Testori, Tiziano" uniqKey="Testori T" first="Tiziano" last="Testori">Tiziano Testori</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Galante, Jorge" sort="Galante, Jorge" uniqKey="Galante J" first="Jorge" last="Galante">Jorge Galante</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Zetterqvist, Lars" sort="Zetterqvist, Lars" uniqKey="Zetterqvist L" first="Lars" last="Zetterqvist">Lars Zetterqvist</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY</title>
<idno type="ISSN">1496-4155</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1708-8240</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">10</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="280">280</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="289">289</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">10</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="1998-11">1998-11</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">1496-4155</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1496-4155</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment connection</term>
<term>Bone density</term>
<term>Bone formation</term>
<term>Bone healing</term>
<term>Clinical dentistry</term>
<term>Clinical evidence</term>
<term>Clinical observations</term>
<term>Clinical performance</term>
<term>Contact osteogenesis</term>
<term>Contact values</term>
<term>Cumulative implant survival rate</term>
<term>Dental arch</term>
<term>Dental implants</term>
<term>Distance osteogenesis</term>
<term>Early implant loading</term>
<term>Esthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Fibrin clot</term>
<term>Fibrin network</term>
<term>Functional loading</term>
<term>Healing times</term>
<term>Higher contact</term>
<term>Histologic</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Implant distribution</term>
<term>Implant integration</term>
<term>Implant mobility</term>
<term>Implant performance</term>
<term>Implant placement</term>
<term>Implant surface</term>
<term>Implant surfaces</term>
<term>Implant surgery</term>
<term>Implant survival</term>
<term>Loading osseotite</term>
<term>Machined</term>
<term>Machined surface</term>
<term>Machined surfaces</term>
<term>Multicenter</term>
<term>Nonintegrated implants</term>
<term>Osseotite</term>
<term>Osseotite implants</term>
<term>Osseotite surface</term>
<term>Osteogenic cells</term>
<term>Overdenture abutments</term>
<term>Palm beach gardens</term>
<term>Partial dentures</term>
<term>Preliminary results</term>
<term>Present study</term>
<term>Private practice</term>
<term>Profound contact</term>
<term>Prospective multicenter study</term>
<term>Prosthet dent</term>
<term>Prosthetic</term>
<term>Prosthetic principles</term>
<term>Prosthetic procedures</term>
<term>Provisional restorations</term>
<term>Pure titanium implants</term>
<term>Rabbit femurs</term>
<term>Second molar</term>
<term>Surgical</term>
<term>Surgical protocol</term>
<term>Titanium</term>
<term>Titanium abutment</term>
<term>West palm beach</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment connection</term>
<term>Bone density</term>
<term>Bone formation</term>
<term>Bone healing</term>
<term>Clinical dentistry</term>
<term>Clinical evidence</term>
<term>Clinical observations</term>
<term>Clinical performance</term>
<term>Contact osteogenesis</term>
<term>Contact values</term>
<term>Cumulative implant survival rate</term>
<term>Dental arch</term>
<term>Dental implants</term>
<term>Distance osteogenesis</term>
<term>Early implant loading</term>
<term>Esthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Fibrin clot</term>
<term>Fibrin network</term>
<term>Functional loading</term>
<term>Healing times</term>
<term>Higher contact</term>
<term>Histologic</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Implant distribution</term>
<term>Implant integration</term>
<term>Implant mobility</term>
<term>Implant performance</term>
<term>Implant placement</term>
<term>Implant surface</term>
<term>Implant surfaces</term>
<term>Implant surgery</term>
<term>Implant survival</term>
<term>Loading osseotite</term>
<term>Machined</term>
<term>Machined surface</term>
<term>Machined surfaces</term>
<term>Multicenter</term>
<term>Nonintegrated implants</term>
<term>Osseotite</term>
<term>Osseotite implants</term>
<term>Osseotite surface</term>
<term>Osteogenic cells</term>
<term>Overdenture abutments</term>
<term>Palm beach gardens</term>
<term>Partial dentures</term>
<term>Preliminary results</term>
<term>Present study</term>
<term>Private practice</term>
<term>Profound contact</term>
<term>Prospective multicenter study</term>
<term>Prosthet dent</term>
<term>Prosthetic</term>
<term>Prosthetic principles</term>
<term>Prosthetic procedures</term>
<term>Provisional restorations</term>
<term>Pure titanium implants</term>
<term>Rabbit femurs</term>
<term>Second molar</term>
<term>Surgical</term>
<term>Surgical protocol</term>
<term>Titanium</term>
<term>Titanium abutment</term>
<term>West palm beach</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract">Abstract: Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName>
<keywords><teeft><json:string>implant</json:string>
<json:string>osseotite</json:string>
<json:string>abutment</json:string>
<json:string>implant surface</json:string>
<json:string>implant placement</json:string>
<json:string>osseotite implants</json:string>
<json:string>histologic</json:string>
<json:string>prosthetic</json:string>
<json:string>machined</json:string>
<json:string>osseotite surface</json:string>
<json:string>provisional restorations</json:string>
<json:string>multicenter</json:string>
<json:string>implant integration</json:string>
<json:string>surgical</json:string>
<json:string>functional loading</json:string>
<json:string>prospective multicenter study</json:string>
<json:string>surgical protocol</json:string>
<json:string>nonintegrated implants</json:string>
<json:string>cumulative implant survival rate</json:string>
<json:string>esthetic dentistry</json:string>
<json:string>machined surfaces</json:string>
<json:string>healing times</json:string>
<json:string>west palm beach</json:string>
<json:string>prosthet dent</json:string>
<json:string>dental implants</json:string>
<json:string>implant mobility</json:string>
<json:string>overdenture abutments</json:string>
<json:string>fibrin clot</json:string>
<json:string>private practice</json:string>
<json:string>implant distribution</json:string>
<json:string>profound contact</json:string>
<json:string>preliminary results</json:string>
<json:string>implant performance</json:string>
<json:string>contact values</json:string>
<json:string>palm beach gardens</json:string>
<json:string>rabbit femurs</json:string>
<json:string>early implant loading</json:string>
<json:string>loading osseotite</json:string>
<json:string>fibrin network</json:string>
<json:string>clinical evidence</json:string>
<json:string>partial dentures</json:string>
<json:string>implant surfaces</json:string>
<json:string>prosthetic principles</json:string>
<json:string>bone density</json:string>
<json:string>clinical observations</json:string>
<json:string>abutment connection</json:string>
<json:string>machined surface</json:string>
<json:string>implant surgery</json:string>
<json:string>bone healing</json:string>
<json:string>implant survival</json:string>
<json:string>prosthetic procedures</json:string>
<json:string>dental arch</json:string>
<json:string>second molar</json:string>
<json:string>clinical performance</json:string>
<json:string>higher contact</json:string>
<json:string>bone formation</json:string>
<json:string>osteogenic cells</json:string>
<json:string>contact osteogenesis</json:string>
<json:string>distance osteogenesis</json:string>
<json:string>present study</json:string>
<json:string>titanium abutment</json:string>
<json:string>clinical dentistry</json:string>
<json:string>pure titanium implants</json:string>
<json:string>titanium</json:string>
</teeft>
</keywords>
<author><json:item><name>RICHARD J. LAZZARA D.MD, MScD</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>STEPHAX S. PORTER DDS, MSD, MS</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</json:string>
<json:string>Correspondence address: Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>TIZIANO TESTORI MD, DDS</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>JORGE GALANTE DR Odontolôgo</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>LARS ZETTERQVIST DDS</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
</author>
<articleId><json:string>JERD280</json:string>
</articleId>
<arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-4XZK438J-5</arkIstex>
<language><json:string>eng</json:string>
</language>
<originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string>
</originalGenre>
<abstract>Abstract: Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.</abstract>
<qualityIndicators><score>8.476</score>
<pdfWordCount>3476</pdfWordCount>
<pdfCharCount>23873</pdfCharCount>
<pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion>
<pdfPageCount>10</pdfPageCount>
<pdfPageSize>558 x 773.759 pts</pdfPageSize>
<refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative>
<abstractWordCount>355</abstractWordCount>
<abstractCharCount>2508</abstractCharCount>
<keywordCount>0</keywordCount>
</qualityIndicators>
<title>A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
<genre><json:string>article</json:string>
</genre>
<host><title>Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry</title>
<language><json:string>unknown</json:string>
</language>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8240</json:string>
</doi>
<issn><json:string>1496-4155</json:string>
</issn>
<eissn><json:string>1708-8240</json:string>
</eissn>
<publisherId><json:string>JERD</json:string>
</publisherId>
<volume>10</volume>
<issue>6</issue>
<pages><first>280</first>
<last>289</last>
<total>10</total>
</pages>
<genre><json:string>journal</json:string>
</genre>
</host>
<namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1998</json:string>
</date>
<geogName><json:string>Beach Gardens</json:string>
<json:string>Beach Lakes Blvd</json:string>
</geogName>
<orgName><json:string>Innovations Inc.</json:string>
<json:string>Implant Innovations Inc.</json:string>
<json:string>Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</json:string>
<json:string>University of Maryland</json:string>
</orgName>
<orgName_funder></orgName_funder>
<orgName_provider></orgName_provider>
<persName><json:string>Dan Sullivan</json:string>
<json:string>Stephan S. Porter</json:string>
<json:string>I. Osseoirrtegratiorrand</json:string>
<json:string>Professor</json:string>
<json:string>Sylvan Feldman</json:string>
<json:string>Jim Kenealy</json:string>
<json:string>Eduardo Anitua</json:string>
<json:string>Radiograph</json:string>
<json:string>I. Zarb</json:string>
<json:string>Renato Rossi</json:string>
<json:string>Gianpaolo Vicenzi</json:string>
<json:string>H. Influence</json:string>
</persName>
<placeName><json:string>Mar del Plata</json:string>
<json:string>Georgia</json:string>
<json:string>Argentina</json:string>
<json:string>Imoberdorf</json:string>
<json:string>Atlanta</json:string>
<json:string>Chicago</json:string>
<json:string>Palm Beach</json:string>
<json:string>Sweden</json:string>
</placeName>
<ref_url></ref_url>
<ref_bibl><json:string>Cordioli et al</json:string>
</ref_bibl>
<bibl></bibl>
</unitex>
</namedEntities>
<ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-4XZK438J-5</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>
</scopus>
</categories>
<publicationDate>1998</publicationDate>
<copyrightDate>1998</copyrightDate>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x</json:string>
</doi>
<id>919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7</id>
<score>1</score>
<fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension>
<original>true</original>
<mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/fulltext/pdf</uri>
</json:item>
<json:item><extension>zip</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/zip</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/fulltext/zip</uri>
</json:item>
<istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="1998-11"></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">A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
<author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">RICHARD J.</forename>
<surname>LAZZARA</surname>
<roleName type="degree">D.MD, MScD</roleName>
</persName>
<affiliation>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0001" role="corresp"><persName><forename type="first">STEPHAX S.</forename>
<surname>PORTER</surname>
<roleName type="degree">DDS, MSD, MS</roleName>
</persName>
<affiliation>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida<address><country key="US"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
<affiliation>Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">TIZIANO</forename>
<surname>TESTORI</surname>
<roleName type="degree">MD, DDS</roleName>
</persName>
<affiliation>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy<address><country key="IT"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">JORGE</forename>
<surname>GALANTE</surname>
<roleName type="degree">DR Odontolôgo</roleName>
</persName>
<affiliation>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina<address><country key="AR"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">LARS</forename>
<surname>ZETTERQVIST</surname>
<roleName type="degree">DDS</roleName>
</persName>
<affiliation>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden<address><country key="SE"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<idno type="istex">919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7</idno>
<idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-4XZK438J-5</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x</idno>
<idno type="unit">JERD280</idno>
<idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:JERD.JERD280.pdf</idno>
</analytic>
<monogr><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY</title>
<idno type="pISSN">1496-4155</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1708-8240</idno>
<idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8240</idno>
<idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/jerd.1998.10.issue-6</idno>
<idno type="product">JERD</idno>
<idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">10</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="280">280</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="289">289</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">10</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="1998-11"></date>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p><hi rend="bold">Abstract: </hi>
Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.</p>
</abstract>
<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/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/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)1708-8240</doi>
<issn type="print">1496-4155</issn>
<issn type="electronic">1708-8240</issn>
<idGroup><id type="product" value="JERD"></id>
<id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id>
</idGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main" sort="JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY">Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry</title>
</titleGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="part" position="11006"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/jerd.1998.10.issue-6</doi>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="10">10</numbering>
<numbering type="journalIssue" number="6">6</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<coverDate startDate="1998-11">November 1998</coverDate>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0028000" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x</doi>
<idGroup><id type="unit" value="JERD280"></id>
</idGroup>
<countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="10"></count>
</countGroup>
<eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2007-07-01"></event>
<event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2007-07-01"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:HeaderRef result:HeaderRef" date="2010-03-10"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-30"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-30"></event>
</eventGroup>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="280">280</numbering>
<numbering type="pageLast" number="289">289</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<correspondenceTo>Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</correspondenceTo>
<linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:JERD.JERD280.pdf"></link>
</linkGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<contentMeta><countGroup><count type="referenceTotal" number="21"></count>
<count type="linksCrossRef" number="6"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main">A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
</titleGroup>
<creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>RICHARD J.</givenNames>
<familyName>LAZZARA</familyName>
<degrees>D.MD, MScD</degrees>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>STEPHAX S.</givenNames>
<familyName>PORTER</familyName>
<degrees>DDS, MSD, MS</degrees>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a3"><personName><givenNames>TIZIANO</givenNames>
<familyName>TESTORI</familyName>
<degrees>MD, DDS</degrees>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a4"><personName><givenNames>JORGE</givenNames>
<familyName>GALANTE</familyName>
<degrees>DR Odontolôgo</degrees>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr5" affiliationRef="#a5"><personName><givenNames>LARS</givenNames>
<familyName>ZETTERQVIST</familyName>
<degrees>DDS</degrees>
</personName>
</creator>
</creators>
<affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="US"><unparsedAffiliation>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a3" countryCode="IT"><unparsedAffiliation>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a4" countryCode="AR"><unparsedAffiliation>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a5" countryCode="SE"><unparsedAffiliation>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
</affiliationGroup>
<abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Abstract: </b>
Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.</p>
</abstract>
</abstractGroup>
</contentMeta>
</header>
</component>
</istex:document>
</istex:metadataXml>
<mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">RICHARD J.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">LAZZARA</namePart>
<namePart type="termsOfAddress">D.MD, MScD</namePart>
<affiliation>Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland, Periodontal and Implant Regenerative Center, Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">STEPHAX S.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">PORTER</namePart>
<namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS, MSD, MS</namePart>
<affiliation>Private Practice, West Palm Beach, Florida</affiliation>
<affiliation>Correspondence address: Reprint requests: Stephan S. Porter, DDS, MSD, MS, 1897 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 215, West Palm Beach, FL 33409</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">TIZIANO</namePart>
<namePart type="family">TESTORI</namePart>
<namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD, DDS</namePart>
<affiliation>Visiting Professor, Section of Implantology, Department of Periodontology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">JORGE</namePart>
<namePart type="family">GALANTE</namePart>
<namePart type="termsOfAddress">DR Odontolôgo</namePart>
<affiliation>Private Practice, Mar del Plata, Argentina</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">LARS</namePart>
<namePart type="family">ZETTERQVIST</namePart>
<namePart type="termsOfAddress">DDS</namePart>
<affiliation>Private Practice, Gefle, Sweden</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">1998-11</dateIssued>
<copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1998</copyrightDate>
</originInfo>
<language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription><extent unit="references">21</extent>
<extent unit="linksCrossRef">6</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract>Abstract: Historically, the recommended time between placement and functional loading of machined‐surface dental implants has been 3 months for the mandible and 6 months for the maxilla. However, such recommendations are a result of evaluating randomly chosen healing times during the initial phase of implant development and are based on the subsequent clinical outcome of either implant integration or mobility. In recent years, histologic and experimental studies have shown that specifically designed micro‐topographic implant surfaces can result in increased bone‐to‐implant contact at earlier healing times than obtained with machined‐surface implants. Histologic and clinical studies investigating early and immediate implant loading support the premise that implants can be placed into function earlier than previously recommended. With the development of specifically designed implant surfaces and the utilization of time‐saving surgical (one‐stage surgical protocol) and prosthetic (implant position indexing) techniques, patients are now being restored and returning to function sooner than previously thought possible. The purpose of this multicenter clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of loading Osseotite dental implants (3i‐Implant Innovations Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida) at 2 months and to determine the effect of early loading on implant performance and survival. A total of 429 Osseotite implants were placed in 155 patients (87 females and 68 males; mean age 54.0 ± 13.7 yr), at 10 study centers, and subsequently loaded 2.1 ± 0.7 months following placement. A single‐stage surgical protocol was followed, with implants indexed immediately or impressed 4 to 6 weeks following placement. Patient restorative treatments included placement of 83 single‐implant provisional restorations and 129 splinted, two‐, three‐, and four‐implant supported maxillary and mandibular provisional restorations. The mean time from prosthetic loading to the most recent follow‐up evaluation was 10 ± 1.3 months. Seven of the 429 implants did not integrate; of these, six were identified prior to loading and one was identified 1 month after loading. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.5% at 12.6 months. The cumulative post‐loading implant survival rate was 99.8% at 10.5 months. The preliminary results of this clinical investigation suggest that successful functional loading of the Osseotite dental implant is possible at 2 months following noncomplicated implant placement.</abstract>
<relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry</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">1496-4155</identifier>
<identifier type="eISSN">1708-8240</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1708-8240</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID">JERD</identifier>
<part><date>1998</date>
<detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption>
<number>10</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption>
<number>6</number>
</detail>
<extent unit="pages"><start>280</start>
<end>289</end>
<total>10</total>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="istex">919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7</identifier>
<identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-4XZK438J-5</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00505.x</identifier>
<identifier type="ArticleID">JERD280</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/919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7/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 004875 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 004875 | 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:919EE7CD83474EC471DCD02D4E78FC03DE7527C7 |texte= A Prospective Multicenter Study Evaluating Loading of Osseotite Implants Two Months After Placement: One‐Year Results }}
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. | ![]() |