Clinical evaluation of single-tooth mini-implant restorations: A five-year retrospective study
Identifieur interne : 008F76 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 008F75; suivant : 008F77Clinical evaluation of single-tooth mini-implant restorations: A five-year retrospective study
Auteurs : Paolo Vigolo ; Andrea GivaniSource :
- The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry [ 0022-3913 ] ; 2000.
Descripteurs français
- Wicri :
- topic : Traumatisme.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Alveolar bone, Bone density, Bone quality, Clinical evaluation, Custom posts, Customscrewed post, Dent, Dental implants, Dichotomic records, Edentulous, Edentulous arches, Edentulous areas, Edentulous jaws, Edentulous patients, Final crowns, First premolar, Gingival inflammation, Implant, Implant diameter, Implant innovations, Implant restoration, Implant survival rate, Incisor, Kerr italia, Lekholm, Marginal bone resorption, Maxilla, Maxillofac, Mucosal response, Observation period, Occlusal, Occlusal contacts, Occlusal scheme, Oral maxillofac implants, Osseointegrated, Osseointegrated implants, Periodont rest dent, Periodontal, Periodontal disease, Porcelain occlusal, Premolar, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Protrusive movements, Provisional resin crowns, Retrospective, Retrospective multicenter evaluation, Retrospective study, Same prosthodontist, Same surgeon, Sample group, Second stage surgery, Single teeth, Small diameter implants, Soft tissues, Space problems, Standard implant restoration, Success rate, Temp bond, Temporary cement, Toronto study, Total implant survival rate, Trauma, Trauma trauma, Ultimate pullout force, Wide diameter implants, Zarb.
- Teeft :
- Alveolar bone, Bone density, Bone quality, Clinical evaluation, Custom posts, Customscrewed post, Dent, Dental implants, Dichotomic records, Edentulous, Edentulous arches, Edentulous areas, Edentulous jaws, Edentulous patients, Final crowns, First premolar, Gingival inflammation, Implant, Implant diameter, Implant innovations, Implant restoration, Implant survival rate, Incisor, Kerr italia, Lekholm, Marginal bone resorption, Maxilla, Maxillofac, Mucosal response, Observation period, Occlusal, Occlusal contacts, Occlusal scheme, Oral maxillofac implants, Osseointegrated, Osseointegrated implants, Periodont rest dent, Periodontal, Periodontal disease, Porcelain occlusal, Premolar, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Protrusive movements, Provisional resin crowns, Retrospective, Retrospective multicenter evaluation, Retrospective study, Same prosthodontist, Same surgeon, Sample group, Second stage surgery, Single teeth, Small diameter implants, Soft tissues, Space problems, Standard implant restoration, Success rate, Temp bond, Temporary cement, Toronto study, Total implant survival rate, Trauma, Trauma trauma, Ultimate pullout force, Wide diameter implants, Zarb.
Abstract
Abstract: Statement of Problem: Placement of small diameter implants often provides a solution to space problems in implant restoration. Analysis of the success of this type of implant restoration has not been clearly determined. Purpose: This 5-year retrospective study presents results from 52 mini-implants for single-tooth restorations placed in 44 patients from 1992 to 1994. Material and Methods: Dental records of 44 patients with 52 mini-implants placed during 1992-94 were reviewed. The implants were all placed by the same surgeon and the single-tooth custom screwed posts with cemented crowns were positioned on the implants by the same prosthodontist. Results: The results achieved by the mini-implant rehabilitation were similar to those reported for standard single-tooth implant restoration. Total implant survival rate was 94.2%. Two implants were lost at second stage surgery, and another was lost after temporary loading. Conclusion: The results suggest that single-tooth mini-implant restoration can be a successful treatment alternative to solve both functional and esthetic problems. They may represent the preferred choice in cases where space problems limit the use of standard or wide diameter implants. (J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:50-4.)
Url:
DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2000.107674
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 003861
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 003861
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 004021
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 009362
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 008F76
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Clinical evaluation of single-tooth mini-implant restorations: A five-year retrospective study</title><author><name sortKey="Vigolo, Paolo" sort="Vigolo, Paolo" uniqKey="Vigolo P" first="Paolo" last="Vigolo">Paolo Vigolo</name></author><author><name sortKey="Givani, Andrea" sort="Givani, Andrea" uniqKey="Givani A" first="Andrea" last="Givani">Andrea Givani</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:7262DBD0F5916E445D0E826E3D81631A398862C8</idno><date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date><idno type="doi">10.1067/mpr.2000.107674</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/7262DBD0F5916E445D0E826E3D81631A398862C8/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">003861</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">003861</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">003861</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">004021</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">004021</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0022-3913:2000:Vigolo P:clinical:evaluation:of</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">009362</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">008F76</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">008F76</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Clinical evaluation of single-tooth mini-implant restorations: A five-year retrospective study</title><author><name sortKey="Vigolo, Paolo" sort="Vigolo, Paolo" uniqKey="Vigolo P" first="Paolo" last="Vigolo">Paolo Vigolo</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Practice</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Givani, Andrea" sort="Givani, Andrea" uniqKey="Givani A" first="Andrea" last="Givani">Andrea Givani</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Practice</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="2000">2000</date><biblScope unit="volume">84</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="50">50</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="54">54</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Alveolar bone</term><term>Bone density</term><term>Bone quality</term><term>Clinical evaluation</term><term>Custom posts</term><term>Customscrewed post</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dichotomic records</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous arches</term><term>Edentulous areas</term><term>Edentulous jaws</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Final crowns</term><term>First premolar</term><term>Gingival inflammation</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant diameter</term><term>Implant innovations</term><term>Implant restoration</term><term>Implant survival rate</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Kerr italia</term><term>Lekholm</term><term>Marginal bone resorption</term><term>Maxilla</term><term>Maxillofac</term><term>Mucosal response</term><term>Observation period</term><term>Occlusal</term><term>Occlusal contacts</term><term>Occlusal scheme</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegrated implants</term><term>Periodont rest dent</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal disease</term><term>Porcelain occlusal</term><term>Premolar</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Protrusive movements</term><term>Provisional resin crowns</term><term>Retrospective</term><term>Retrospective multicenter evaluation</term><term>Retrospective study</term><term>Same prosthodontist</term><term>Same surgeon</term><term>Sample group</term><term>Second stage surgery</term><term>Single teeth</term><term>Small diameter implants</term><term>Soft tissues</term><term>Space problems</term><term>Standard implant restoration</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Temp bond</term><term>Temporary cement</term><term>Toronto study</term><term>Total implant survival rate</term><term>Trauma</term><term>Trauma trauma</term><term>Ultimate pullout force</term><term>Wide diameter implants</term><term>Zarb</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Alveolar bone</term><term>Bone density</term><term>Bone quality</term><term>Clinical evaluation</term><term>Custom posts</term><term>Customscrewed post</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dichotomic records</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous arches</term><term>Edentulous areas</term><term>Edentulous jaws</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Final crowns</term><term>First premolar</term><term>Gingival inflammation</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant diameter</term><term>Implant innovations</term><term>Implant restoration</term><term>Implant survival rate</term><term>Incisor</term><term>Kerr italia</term><term>Lekholm</term><term>Marginal bone resorption</term><term>Maxilla</term><term>Maxillofac</term><term>Mucosal response</term><term>Observation period</term><term>Occlusal</term><term>Occlusal contacts</term><term>Occlusal scheme</term><term>Oral maxillofac implants</term><term>Osseointegrated</term><term>Osseointegrated implants</term><term>Periodont rest dent</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal disease</term><term>Porcelain occlusal</term><term>Premolar</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Protrusive movements</term><term>Provisional resin crowns</term><term>Retrospective</term><term>Retrospective multicenter evaluation</term><term>Retrospective study</term><term>Same prosthodontist</term><term>Same surgeon</term><term>Sample group</term><term>Second stage surgery</term><term>Single teeth</term><term>Small diameter implants</term><term>Soft tissues</term><term>Space problems</term><term>Standard implant restoration</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Temp bond</term><term>Temporary cement</term><term>Toronto study</term><term>Total implant survival rate</term><term>Trauma</term><term>Trauma trauma</term><term>Ultimate pullout force</term><term>Wide diameter implants</term><term>Zarb</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Traumatisme</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Abstract: Statement of Problem: Placement of small diameter implants often provides a solution to space problems in implant restoration. Analysis of the success of this type of implant restoration has not been clearly determined. Purpose: This 5-year retrospective study presents results from 52 mini-implants for single-tooth restorations placed in 44 patients from 1992 to 1994. Material and Methods: Dental records of 44 patients with 52 mini-implants placed during 1992-94 were reviewed. The implants were all placed by the same surgeon and the single-tooth custom screwed posts with cemented crowns were positioned on the implants by the same prosthodontist. Results: The results achieved by the mini-implant rehabilitation were similar to those reported for standard single-tooth implant restoration. Total implant survival rate was 94.2%. Two implants were lost at second stage surgery, and another was lost after temporary loading. Conclusion: The results suggest that single-tooth mini-implant restoration can be a successful treatment alternative to solve both functional and esthetic problems. They may represent the preferred choice in cases where space problems limit the use of standard or wide diameter implants. (J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:50-4.)</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Givani, Andrea" sort="Givani, Andrea" uniqKey="Givani A" first="Andrea" last="Givani">Andrea Givani</name><name sortKey="Vigolo, Paolo" sort="Vigolo, Paolo" uniqKey="Vigolo P" first="Paolo" last="Vigolo">Paolo Vigolo</name></noCountry></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 008F76 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 008F76 | 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= ISTEX:7262DBD0F5916E445D0E826E3D81631A398862C8
|texte= Clinical evaluation of single-tooth mini-implant restorations: A five-year retrospective study
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |