A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.
Identifieur interne : 004E79 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 004E78; suivant : 004E80A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.
Auteurs : Ignace Naert ; Stella Gizani ; Magda Vuylsteke ; Daniel Van SteenbergheSource :
- Clinical Oral Implants Research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 1998-06.
Abstract
Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.
Url:
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830ALe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</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, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gizani, Stella" sort="Gizani, Stella" uniqKey="Gizani S" first="Stella" last="Gizani">Stella Gizani</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Vuylsteke, Magda" sort="Vuylsteke, Magda" uniqKey="Vuylsteke M" first="Magda" last="Vuylsteke">Magda Vuylsteke</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University 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, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A</idno><date when="1998" year="1998">1998</date><idno type="doi">10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">004E79</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">004E79</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</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, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gizani, Stella" sort="Gizani, Stella" uniqKey="Gizani S" first="Stella" last="Gizani">Stella Gizani</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Vuylsteke, Magda" sort="Vuylsteke, Magda" uniqKey="Vuylsteke M" first="Magda" last="Vuylsteke">Magda Vuylsteke</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University 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, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH</title><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0501</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">9</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="170">170</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="177">177</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1998-06">1998-06</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Ignace Naert</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Stella Gizani</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Magda Vuylsteke</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Daniel Van Steenberghe</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>dental endosseous implants</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>overdenture</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>peri‐implant diagnosis</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>bar‐magnet</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>ball attachments</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>CLR090304</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-6JDD31DL-7</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.</abstract><qualityIndicators><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>174</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1120</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>5</keywordCount><score>4.138</score><pdfWordCount>0</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>0</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>8</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>552 x 758 pts</pdfPageSize></qualityIndicators><title>A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title><pmid><json:string>10530131</json:string></pmid><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>0905-7161</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1600-0501</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>CLR</json:string></publisherId><volume>9</volume><issue>3</issue><pages><first>170</first><last>177</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1998</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName></persName><placeName></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-6JDD31DL-7</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - engineering, biomedical</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 - 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><json:string>4 - radiotherapie. traitement instrumental. physiotherapie. reeducation. readaptation, orthophonie, crenotherapie. traitement dietetique et traitements divers (generalites)</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1998</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1998</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x</json:string></doi><id>9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>ocr</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/ocr</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/ocr</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1998-06"></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 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title><title level="a" type="short">Peri‐implant outcome in mandibular overdenture therapy</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Ignace</forename><surname>Naert</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Stella</forename><surname>Gizani</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Magda</forename><surname>Vuylsteke</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Daniel</forename><surname>Van Steenberghe</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium<address><country key="BE"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-6JDD31DL-7</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x</idno><idno type="unit">CLR090304</idno><idno type="supplier"></idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:CLR.CLR090304.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title><title level="j" type="alt">CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH</title><idno type="pISSN">0905-7161</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0501</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/clr.1998.9.issue-3</idno><idno type="product">CLR</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">9</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="170">170</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="177">177</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1998-06"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p>Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">dental endosseous implants</term><term xml:id="k2">overdenture</term><term xml:id="k3">peri‐implant diagnosis</term><term xml:id="k4">bar‐magnet</term><term xml:id="k5">ball attachments</term></keywords><keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Original Articles</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change>undefined</change><change>[object Object]</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><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>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisherName><publisherLoc>Copenhagen</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</doi><issn type="print">0905-7161</issn><issn type="electronic">1600-0501</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CLR"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH">Clinical Oral Implants Research</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="06003"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/clr.1998.9.issue-3</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="9">9</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="3">3</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="1998-06">June 1998</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0017000" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CLR090304"></id><id type="supplier" value=""></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2001-12-25"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2001-12-25"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:Header result:Header" date="2010-03-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:4.0.1" date="2014-03-12"></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="170">170</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="177">177</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Prof. I. E. Naert, Dept of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Kapucijnenvoer 7, B‐3000 Leuven, Belgium</correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CLR.CLR090304.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Accepted for publication 6 November 1997</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="linksPubMed" number="0"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="0"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title><title type="shortAuthors">Naert et al.</title><title type="short">Peri‐implant outcome in mandibular overdenture therapy</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Ignace</givenNames><familyName>Naert</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Stella</givenNames><familyName>Gizani</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Magda</givenNames><familyName>Vuylsteke</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a3"><personName><givenNames>Daniel</givenNames><familyName>Van Steenberghe</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="BE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="BE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a3" countryCode="BE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">dental endosseous implants</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">overdenture</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">peri‐implant diagnosis</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">bar‐magnet</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">ball attachments</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Peri‐implant outcome in mandibular overdenture therapy</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ignace</namePart><namePart type="family">Naert</namePart><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Stella</namePart><namePart type="family">Gizani</namePart><affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, BIOMAT Research Group, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium;</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Magda</namePart><namePart type="family">Vuylsteke</namePart><affiliation>Department of Statistics, Computing Centre, Catholic University 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><affiliation>Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Catholic University 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>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Copenhagen</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1998-06</dateIssued><edition>Accepted for publication 6 November 1997</edition><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="linksCrossRef">0</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Thirty‐six completely edentulous patients were enrolled for a 5‐year prospective study testing the treatment outcome between splinted and unsplinted implants retaining a mandibular hinging overdenture. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of equal size depending on the attachment system used such as: magnets, ball attachments or bars (reference group). Only 1 implant out of the 72 had failed at the abutment stage. Not a single implant failed during the 5‐year loading period. The accumulation of plaque was significantly higher for the Magnet than for the Ball group. Bleeding on probing, as well as marginal bone level, attachment level and Periotestg values did not statistically differ among the groups, neither at year 1 nor at year 5. However, the Periotestm values were significantly lower at year 5 compared to year 1 for all groups, which indicates a higher rigidity at the bone‐implant interface. No correlation was found between bleeding on probing and marginal bone loss. We conclude that the connection state of 2 implants retaining a hinging overdenture did not influence the peri‐implant outcome.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>dental endosseous implants</topic><topic>overdenture</topic><topic>peri‐implant diagnosis</topic><topic>bar‐magnet</topic><topic>ball attachments</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Clinical Oral Implants 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">0905-7161</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1600-0501</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0501</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CLR</identifier><part><date>1998</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>9</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>3</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>170</start><end>177</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-6JDD31DL-7</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0501.1998.090304.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CLR090304</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>Munksgaard International Publishers</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A/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 004E79 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 004E79 | 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:9D76C88F6832C831D8105A62F194A1B1316C830A
|texte= A 5‐year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in the mandibular overdenture therapy. Part I: peri‐implant outcome.
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |