Use of 5‐mm‐diameter implants: Periotest® values related to a clinical and radiographic evaluation
Identifieur interne : 001B79 ( Istex/Curation ); précédent : 001B78; suivant : 001B80Use of 5‐mm‐diameter implants: Periotest® values related to a clinical and radiographic evaluation
Auteurs : Carlos Aparicio [Espagne, Suède] ; Paulina Orozco [Espagne]Source :
- Clinical Oral Implants Research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 1998-12.
Abstract
A modified design of the original Brånemark implant consisting of a cp. Titanium 5.0‐mm‐diameter self‐tapping implant threaded up to the marginal platform has been proposed for specific indications. From February 1992 to November 1995, a total of 185 machined screw implants (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) were installed in 45 patients to withstand 58 prostheses. Of these, 91 were 3.75mm diameter and 94 were 5.0mm wide. Most of the implants were placed in type B and C bone quantity and type 2 and 3 bone quality. A retrospective evaluation with regard to indications, marginal bone remodelling, Periotest® values (ID) and survival rate is presented. PTv and radiographic measurements were made at abutment connection and repeated 3, 6 and 12 months later and thereafter every year. The follow‐up ranged from 16 to 55 months (mean 32.9 months) post‐loading. Three patients with 8 5.0mm implants dropped‐out of the study at different stages. Out of the wide implants, 1 was expelled during the healing period; 3 were found mobile at the abutment connection; 1 lost its osseointegration suddenly after 2 years of function; 4 belonging to 1 patient did not meet the success criteria due to continuous marginal bone loss. The cumulative success rate of 5.0mm implants (CSR) after 1 year of function was 97.2% for upper jaws and 88.4% in mandibles, whereas the CSR in maxilla after 48 months was 97.2% and 83.4% in mandibles. The obtained PTv from 5.0mm‐wide fixtures in maxilla and mandibles were respectively 1.1 and 0.6 units lower than those obtained PTv for 3.75mm‐diameter implants in the same patients. The hypothesis that there are differences in the damping capacity of the bone surrounding a 5.0mm‐wide implant compared to the 3.75mm‐diameter implant is supported by the PTv results.
Url:
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.090605.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :001B79
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:38C8197A56AE18FCBE7BC7F62E319A7DADC0C2E2Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Use of 5‐mm‐diameter implants: Periotest® values related to a clinical and radiographic evaluation</title>
<author><name sortKey="Aparicio, Carlos" sort="Aparicio, Carlos" uniqKey="Aparicio C" first="Carlos" last="Aparicio">Carlos Aparicio</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona, Spain;</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr" wicri:curation="lc">Espagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona</wicri:regionArea>
</affiliation>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Institute for Surgical Science, Department of Biomaterials Handicap Research, Göteborg University, Sweden</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">Suède</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Institute for Surgical Science, Department of Biomaterials Handicap Research, Göteborg University</wicri:regionArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Orozco, Paulina" sort="Orozco, Paulina" uniqKey="Orozco P" first="Paulina" last="Orozco">Paulina Orozco</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona, Spain;</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr" wicri:curation="lc">Espagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona</wicri:regionArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:38C8197A56AE18FCBE7BC7F62E319A7DADC0C2E2</idno>
<date when="1998" year="1998">1998</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.090605.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/38C8197A56AE18FCBE7BC7F62E319A7DADC0C2E2/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001B79</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001B79</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">001B79</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Use of 5‐mm‐diameter implants: Periotest® values related to a clinical and radiographic evaluation</title>
<author><name sortKey="Aparicio, Carlos" sort="Aparicio, Carlos" uniqKey="Aparicio C" first="Carlos" last="Aparicio">Carlos Aparicio</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona, Spain;</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr" wicri:curation="lc">Espagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona</wicri:regionArea>
</affiliation>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Institute for Surgical Science, Department of Biomaterials Handicap Research, Göteborg University, Sweden</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">Suède</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Institute for Surgical Science, Department of Biomaterials Handicap Research, Göteborg University</wicri:regionArea>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Orozco, Paulina" sort="Orozco, Paulina" uniqKey="Orozco P" first="Paulina" last="Orozco">Paulina Orozco</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona, Spain;</mods:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr" wicri:curation="lc">Espagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Clinica Protesis Osteointegradas Barcelona, General Mitre, 90 B. 08021 Barcelona</wicri:regionArea>
</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">6</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="398">398</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="406">406</biblScope>
<publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher>
<pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="1998-12">1998-12</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">A modified design of the original Brånemark implant consisting of a cp. Titanium 5.0‐mm‐diameter self‐tapping implant threaded up to the marginal platform has been proposed for specific indications. From February 1992 to November 1995, a total of 185 machined screw implants (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) were installed in 45 patients to withstand 58 prostheses. Of these, 91 were 3.75mm diameter and 94 were 5.0mm wide. Most of the implants were placed in type B and C bone quantity and type 2 and 3 bone quality. A retrospective evaluation with regard to indications, marginal bone remodelling, Periotest® values (ID) and survival rate is presented. PTv and radiographic measurements were made at abutment connection and repeated 3, 6 and 12 months later and thereafter every year. The follow‐up ranged from 16 to 55 months (mean 32.9 months) post‐loading. Three patients with 8 5.0mm implants dropped‐out of the study at different stages. Out of the wide implants, 1 was expelled during the healing period; 3 were found mobile at the abutment connection; 1 lost its osseointegration suddenly after 2 years of function; 4 belonging to 1 patient did not meet the success criteria due to continuous marginal bone loss. The cumulative success rate of 5.0mm implants (CSR) after 1 year of function was 97.2% for upper jaws and 88.4% in mandibles, whereas the CSR in maxilla after 48 months was 97.2% and 83.4% in mandibles. The obtained PTv from 5.0mm‐wide fixtures in maxilla and mandibles were respectively 1.1 and 0.6 units lower than those obtained PTv for 3.75mm‐diameter implants in the same patients. The hypothesis that there are differences in the damping capacity of the bone surrounding a 5.0mm‐wide implant compared to the 3.75mm‐diameter implant is supported by the PTv results.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001B79 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 001B79 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= Istex |étape= Curation |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:38C8197A56AE18FCBE7BC7F62E319A7DADC0C2E2 |texte= Use of 5‐mm‐diameter implants: Periotest® values related to a clinical and radiographic evaluation }}
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. | ![]() |