Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1-7 years: a longitudinal study.
Identifieur interne : 006D21 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 006D20; suivant : 006D22Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1-7 years: a longitudinal study.
Auteurs : Eugenio Romeo [Italie] ; Diego Lops ; Leonardo Amorfini ; Matteo Chiapasco ; Marco Ghisolfi ; Giorgio VogelSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2006.
Descripteurs français
- KwdFr :
- Adulte, Adulte d'âge moyen, Analyse de survie, Conception de prothèse dentaire, Couronnes, Densité osseuse (physiologie), Femelle, Humains, Implants dentaires, Implants dentaires unitaires, Mandibule (), Maxillaire (), Mâchoire partiellement édentée (), Mâchoire partiellement édentée (rééducation et réadaptation), Mâle, Pronostic, Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée, Prothèse partielle fixe, Résorption alvéolaire (), Résultat thérapeutique, Sujet âgé, Échec de restauration dentaire, Études de suivi, Études longitudinales.
- MESH :
- physiologie : Densité osseuse.
- rééducation et réadaptation : Mâchoire partiellement édentée.
- Adulte, Adulte d'âge moyen, Analyse de survie, Conception de prothèse dentaire, Couronnes, Femelle, Humains, Implants dentaires, Implants dentaires unitaires, Mandibule, Maxillaire, Mâchoire partiellement édentée, Mâle, Pronostic, Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée, Prothèse partielle fixe, Résorption alvéolaire, Résultat thérapeutique, Sujet âgé, Échec de restauration dentaire, Études de suivi, Études longitudinales.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adult, Aged, Alveolar Bone Loss (classification), Bone Density (physiology), Crowns, Dental Implants, Dental Implants, Single-Tooth, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture, Partial, Fixed, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation), Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery), Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mandible (surgery), Maxilla (surgery), Middle Aged, Prognosis, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- classification : Alveolar Bone Loss.
- physiology : Bone Density.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially, Mandible, Maxilla.
- Adult, Aged, Crowns, Dental Implants, Single-Tooth, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture, Partial, Fixed, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome.
Abstract
Implants with a small diameter may be used where bone width is reduced or in single-tooth gaps with limited mesiodistal space, such as for the replacement of lateral maxillary or mandibular incisors. The purpose of the present longitudinal study was to compare the prognosis of narrow implants (3.3-mm-diameter) to standard (4.1-mm-diameter) implants. Over a 7-year period, 122 narrow implants were inserted in 68 patients to support 45 partial fixed prostheses (PFD) and 23 single-tooth prostheses (ST). Furthermore, 120 patients received 208 standard implants and were restored with 70 PFD and 50 ST, respectively. Clinical and radiographic assessment data were provided. Six (1.8%) out of 330 implants failed. Cumulative survival and success rates were calculated with life-table analyses processed by collecting clinical and radiographic data. For narrow implants, the cumulative survival rate was 98.1% in the maxilla and 96.9% in the mandible. The cumulative success rate was 96.1% in the maxilla and 92% in the mandible. Conversely, standard-diameter implants showed a cumulative survival rate of 96.8% in the maxilla and 97.9% in the mandible. The cumulative success rate was 97.6% in the maxilla and 93.8% in the mandible. Cumulative survival and success rates of small-diameter implants and standard-diameter implants were not statistically different (P > 0.05). Type 4 bone was a determining failure factor, while marginal bone loss was not influenced by the different implant diameters. The results suggest that small-diameter implants can be successfully used in the treatment of partially edentulous patients.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01191.x
PubMed: 16584409
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream PubMed, to step Corpus: 002750
- to stream PubMed, to step Curation: 002750
- to stream PubMed, to step Checkpoint: 002750
- to stream Ncbi, to step Merge: 001940
- to stream Ncbi, to step Curation: 001940
- to stream Ncbi, to step Checkpoint: 001940
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 006E42
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 006D21
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1-7 years: a longitudinal study.</title><author><name sortKey="Romeo, Eugenio" sort="Romeo, Eugenio" uniqKey="Romeo E" first="Eugenio" last="Romeo">Eugenio Romeo</name><affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. eugenio.romeo@unimi.it</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan</wicri:regionArea><placeName><settlement type="city">Milan</settlement><region nuts="2">Lombardie</region></placeName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lops, Diego" sort="Lops, Diego" uniqKey="Lops D" first="Diego" last="Lops">Diego Lops</name></author><author><name sortKey="Amorfini, Leonardo" sort="Amorfini, Leonardo" uniqKey="Amorfini L" first="Leonardo" last="Amorfini">Leonardo Amorfini</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chiapasco, Matteo" sort="Chiapasco, Matteo" uniqKey="Chiapasco M" first="Matteo" last="Chiapasco">Matteo Chiapasco</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ghisolfi, Marco" sort="Ghisolfi, Marco" uniqKey="Ghisolfi M" first="Marco" last="Ghisolfi">Marco Ghisolfi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vogel, Giorgio" sort="Vogel, Giorgio" uniqKey="Vogel G" first="Giorgio" last="Vogel">Giorgio Vogel</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2006">2006</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:16584409</idno><idno type="pmid">16584409</idno><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01191.x</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Curation">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Curation">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Checkpoint">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Checkpoint" wicri:step="PubMed">002750</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Merge">001940</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Curation">001940</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Checkpoint">001940</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0905-7161:2006:Romeo E:clinical:and:radiographic</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">006E42</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">006D21</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">006D21</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1-7 years: a longitudinal study.</title><author><name sortKey="Romeo, Eugenio" sort="Romeo, Eugenio" uniqKey="Romeo E" first="Eugenio" last="Romeo">Eugenio Romeo</name><affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. eugenio.romeo@unimi.it</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan</wicri:regionArea><placeName><settlement type="city">Milan</settlement><region nuts="2">Lombardie</region></placeName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lops, Diego" sort="Lops, Diego" uniqKey="Lops D" first="Diego" last="Lops">Diego Lops</name></author><author><name sortKey="Amorfini, Leonardo" sort="Amorfini, Leonardo" uniqKey="Amorfini L" first="Leonardo" last="Amorfini">Leonardo Amorfini</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chiapasco, Matteo" sort="Chiapasco, Matteo" uniqKey="Chiapasco M" first="Matteo" last="Chiapasco">Matteo Chiapasco</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ghisolfi, Marco" sort="Ghisolfi, Marco" uniqKey="Ghisolfi M" first="Marco" last="Ghisolfi">Marco Ghisolfi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vogel, Giorgio" sort="Vogel, Giorgio" uniqKey="Vogel G" first="Giorgio" last="Vogel">Giorgio Vogel</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Clinical oral implants research</title><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno><imprint><date when="2006" type="published">2006</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Alveolar Bone Loss (classification)</term><term>Bone Density (physiology)</term><term>Crowns</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture, Partial, Fixed</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery)</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible (surgery)</term><term>Maxilla (surgery)</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Survival Analysis</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords><keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte</term><term>Adulte d'âge moyen</term><term>Analyse de survie</term><term>Conception de prothèse dentaire</term><term>Couronnes</term><term>Densité osseuse (physiologie)</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Implants dentaires unitaires</term><term>Mandibule ()</term><term>Maxillaire ()</term><term>Mâchoire partiellement édentée ()</term><term>Mâchoire partiellement édentée (rééducation et réadaptation)</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Pronostic</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Prothèse partielle fixe</term><term>Résorption alvéolaire ()</term><term>Résultat thérapeutique</term><term>Sujet âgé</term><term>Échec de restauration dentaire</term><term>Études de suivi</term><term>Études longitudinales</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="classification" xml:lang="en"><term>Alveolar Bone Loss</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiologie" xml:lang="fr"><term>Densité osseuse</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiology" xml:lang="en"><term>Bone Density</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rééducation et réadaptation" xml:lang="fr"><term>Mâchoire partiellement édentée</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="surgery" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Maxilla</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Crowns</term><term>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture, Partial, Fixed</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Survival Analysis</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte</term><term>Adulte d'âge moyen</term><term>Analyse de survie</term><term>Conception de prothèse dentaire</term><term>Couronnes</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Implants dentaires unitaires</term><term>Mandibule</term><term>Maxillaire</term><term>Mâchoire partiellement édentée</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Pronostic</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Prothèse partielle fixe</term><term>Résorption alvéolaire</term><term>Résultat thérapeutique</term><term>Sujet âgé</term><term>Échec de restauration dentaire</term><term>Études de suivi</term><term>Études longitudinales</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Implants with a small diameter may be used where bone width is reduced or in single-tooth gaps with limited mesiodistal space, such as for the replacement of lateral maxillary or mandibular incisors. The purpose of the present longitudinal study was to compare the prognosis of narrow implants (3.3-mm-diameter) to standard (4.1-mm-diameter) implants. Over a 7-year period, 122 narrow implants were inserted in 68 patients to support 45 partial fixed prostheses (PFD) and 23 single-tooth prostheses (ST). Furthermore, 120 patients received 208 standard implants and were restored with 70 PFD and 50 ST, respectively. Clinical and radiographic assessment data were provided. Six (1.8%) out of 330 implants failed. Cumulative survival and success rates were calculated with life-table analyses processed by collecting clinical and radiographic data. For narrow implants, the cumulative survival rate was 98.1% in the maxilla and 96.9% in the mandible. The cumulative success rate was 96.1% in the maxilla and 92% in the mandible. Conversely, standard-diameter implants showed a cumulative survival rate of 96.8% in the maxilla and 97.9% in the mandible. The cumulative success rate was 97.6% in the maxilla and 93.8% in the mandible. Cumulative survival and success rates of small-diameter implants and standard-diameter implants were not statistically different (P > 0.05). Type 4 bone was a determining failure factor, while marginal bone loss was not influenced by the different implant diameters. The results suggest that small-diameter implants can be successfully used in the treatment of partially edentulous patients.</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>Italie</li></country><region><li>Lombardie</li></region><settlement><li>Milan</li></settlement></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Amorfini, Leonardo" sort="Amorfini, Leonardo" uniqKey="Amorfini L" first="Leonardo" last="Amorfini">Leonardo Amorfini</name><name sortKey="Chiapasco, Matteo" sort="Chiapasco, Matteo" uniqKey="Chiapasco M" first="Matteo" last="Chiapasco">Matteo Chiapasco</name><name sortKey="Ghisolfi, Marco" sort="Ghisolfi, Marco" uniqKey="Ghisolfi M" first="Marco" last="Ghisolfi">Marco Ghisolfi</name><name sortKey="Lops, Diego" sort="Lops, Diego" uniqKey="Lops D" first="Diego" last="Lops">Diego Lops</name><name sortKey="Vogel, Giorgio" sort="Vogel, Giorgio" uniqKey="Vogel G" first="Giorgio" last="Vogel">Giorgio Vogel</name></noCountry><country name="Italie"><region name="Lombardie"><name sortKey="Romeo, Eugenio" sort="Romeo, Eugenio" uniqKey="Romeo E" first="Eugenio" last="Romeo">Eugenio Romeo</name></region></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 006D21 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 006D21 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Main
|étape= Exploration
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:16584409
|texte= Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1-7 years: a longitudinal study.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:16584409" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |