A prospective split‐mouth comparative study of two screw‐shaped self‐tapping pure titanium implant systems
Identifieur interne : 009423 ( Main/Merge ); précédent : 009422; suivant : 009424A prospective split‐mouth comparative study of two screw‐shaped self‐tapping pure titanium implant systems
Auteurs : Daniel Van Steenberghe ; Greet De Mars ; Marc Quirynen ; Reinhilde Jacobs ; Ignace Naert [Belgique]Source :
- Clinical Oral Implants Research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2000-06.
Descripteurs français
- Wicri :
- topic : Titane.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abutment, Abutment surgery, Arztliche implantologie, Astra, Astra implants, Astra tech, Basal bone, Baseline, Bone quality, Bone quantity, Cancellous bone, Catholic university, Clinical picture, Compact bone, Cumulative success rates, Different implant, Different implant surfaces, Edentulous, Edentulous mandible, Edentulous mandibles, Edentulous patients, Endosseous implants, Hard tissues, Implant, Implant lengths, Implant surgery, Implant system, Implant systems, Implants research, International journal, Lekholm, Long terme, Lower jaws, Machined, Machined surface, Machined surface irregularities, Machined surfaces, Marginal bone level, Marginal bone loss, Maxillofacial, Maxillofacial implants, Maxillofacial surgery, More years, Niveau osseux, Nobel biocare, Osseointegrated implants, Patient selection, Periodontal parameters, Plaque, Plaque accumulation, Pocket depth, Prospective multicenter study, Prospective study, Prosthesis, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Prosthetic point, Pure titanium, Pure titanium implant systems, Same patient, Same sites, Selftapping, Selftapping implants, Selftapping mark, Steenberghe, Success rate, Surface roughening, Surgery time, Thin layer, Titanium, Upper jaws astra, Zahnarztliche implantologie.
- Teeft :
- Abutment, Abutment surgery, Arztliche implantologie, Astra, Astra implants, Astra tech, Basal bone, Baseline, Bone quality, Bone quantity, Cancellous bone, Catholic university, Clinical picture, Compact bone, Cumulative success rates, Different implant, Different implant surfaces, Edentulous, Edentulous mandible, Edentulous mandibles, Edentulous patients, Endosseous implants, Hard tissues, Implant, Implant lengths, Implant surgery, Implant system, Implant systems, Implants research, International journal, Lekholm, Long terme, Lower jaws, Machined, Machined surface, Machined surface irregularities, Machined surfaces, Marginal bone level, Marginal bone loss, Maxillofacial, Maxillofacial implants, Maxillofacial surgery, More years, Niveau osseux, Nobel biocare, Osseointegrated implants, Patient selection, Periodontal parameters, Plaque, Plaque accumulation, Pocket depth, Prospective multicenter study, Prospective study, Prosthesis, Prosthetic, Prosthetic dentistry, Prosthetic point, Pure titanium, Pure titanium implant systems, Same patient, Same sites, Selftapping, Selftapping implants, Selftapping mark, Steenberghe, Success rate, Surface roughening, Surgery time, Thin layer, Titanium, Upper jaws astra, Zahnarztliche implantologie.
Abstract
Clinical data indicate different medium and long‐term outcomes of endosseous implants for different implant configurations and in particular implant surfaces. The present study compares 2 very similar implant systems but with different surface characteristics in a split‐mouth‐randomized design. The Astra‐Tech (A) system (Astra‐Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) consisted of selftapping TiO2‐blasted screw‐shaped implants made of commercially pure titanium, and the Brånemark (B) System (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) comprised selftapping Mark II implants with machined surface irregularities. Throughout the 2‐years' observation period, no significant differences could be found concerning probing depths, presence of plaque or change in marginal bone level. A statistically significant difference in location of the marginal bone level in relation to the shoulder of the implant was found in favor of the A system both at baseline and after 2 years. Cumulative success rates of 100% (A) and 97.7% (B) were not statistically different. From a prosthetic point of view, more soldering points were needed for A compared to B to reach clinical acceptable fit. More years of observation are needed to compare the fate of the soft and hard tissues surrounding two different implant surfaces.
Url:
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011003202.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 007536
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 007536
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 004082
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:EC9A8B6A1141DBA3B1DFBA2DB7CFA9F03DAE1037Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A prospective split‐mouth comparative study of two screw‐shaped self‐tapping pure titanium implant systems</title>
<author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" sort="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="Daniel" last="Van Steenberghe">Daniel Van Steenberghe</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="De Mars, Greet" sort="De Mars, Greet" uniqKey="De Mars G" first="Greet" last="De Mars">Greet De Mars</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Quirynen, Marc" sort="Quirynen, Marc" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="Marc" last="Quirynen">Marc Quirynen</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Jacobs, Reinhilde" sort="Jacobs, Reinhilde" uniqKey="Jacobs R" first="Reinhilde" last="Jacobs">Reinhilde Jacobs</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Naert, Ignace" sort="Naert, Ignace" uniqKey="Naert I" first="Ignace" last="Naert">Ignace Naert</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:EC9A8B6A1141DBA3B1DFBA2DB7CFA9F03DAE1037</idno>
<date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011003202.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/EC9A8B6A1141DBA3B1DFBA2DB7CFA9F03DAE1037/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">007536</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">007536</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">007536</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">004082</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">004082</idno>
<idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0905-7161:2000:Van Steenberghe D:a:prospective:split</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">009423</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">A prospective split‐mouth comparative study of two screw‐shaped self‐tapping pure titanium implant systems</title>
<author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" sort="Van Steenberghe, Daniel" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="Daniel" last="Van Steenberghe">Daniel Van Steenberghe</name>
<affiliation></affiliation>
<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Leuven;</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="De Mars, Greet" sort="De Mars, Greet" uniqKey="De Mars G" first="Greet" last="De Mars">Greet De Mars</name>
<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Leuven;</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Quirynen, Marc" sort="Quirynen, Marc" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="Marc" last="Quirynen">Marc Quirynen</name>
<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Leuven;</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Jacobs, Reinhilde" sort="Jacobs, Reinhilde" uniqKey="Jacobs R" first="Reinhilde" last="Jacobs">Reinhilde Jacobs</name>
<affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Leuven;</wicri:noCountry>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Naert, Ignace" sort="Naert, Ignace" uniqKey="Naert I" first="Ignace" last="Naert">Ignace Naert</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Belgique</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Catholic University of Leuven, Leuven</wicri:regionArea>
<wicri:noRegion>Leuven</wicri:noRegion>
</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">11</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="202">202</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="209">209</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">8</biblScope>
<publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher>
<pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2000-06">2000-06</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment surgery</term>
<term>Arztliche implantologie</term>
<term>Astra</term>
<term>Astra implants</term>
<term>Astra tech</term>
<term>Basal bone</term>
<term>Baseline</term>
<term>Bone quality</term>
<term>Bone quantity</term>
<term>Cancellous bone</term>
<term>Catholic university</term>
<term>Clinical picture</term>
<term>Compact bone</term>
<term>Cumulative success rates</term>
<term>Different implant</term>
<term>Different implant surfaces</term>
<term>Edentulous</term>
<term>Edentulous mandible</term>
<term>Edentulous mandibles</term>
<term>Edentulous patients</term>
<term>Endosseous implants</term>
<term>Hard tissues</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Implant lengths</term>
<term>Implant surgery</term>
<term>Implant system</term>
<term>Implant systems</term>
<term>Implants research</term>
<term>International journal</term>
<term>Lekholm</term>
<term>Long terme</term>
<term>Lower jaws</term>
<term>Machined</term>
<term>Machined surface</term>
<term>Machined surface irregularities</term>
<term>Machined surfaces</term>
<term>Marginal bone level</term>
<term>Marginal bone loss</term>
<term>Maxillofacial</term>
<term>Maxillofacial implants</term>
<term>Maxillofacial surgery</term>
<term>More years</term>
<term>Niveau osseux</term>
<term>Nobel biocare</term>
<term>Osseointegrated implants</term>
<term>Patient selection</term>
<term>Periodontal parameters</term>
<term>Plaque</term>
<term>Plaque accumulation</term>
<term>Pocket depth</term>
<term>Prospective multicenter study</term>
<term>Prospective study</term>
<term>Prosthesis</term>
<term>Prosthetic</term>
<term>Prosthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Prosthetic point</term>
<term>Pure titanium</term>
<term>Pure titanium implant systems</term>
<term>Same patient</term>
<term>Same sites</term>
<term>Selftapping</term>
<term>Selftapping implants</term>
<term>Selftapping mark</term>
<term>Steenberghe</term>
<term>Success rate</term>
<term>Surface roughening</term>
<term>Surgery time</term>
<term>Thin layer</term>
<term>Titanium</term>
<term>Upper jaws astra</term>
<term>Zahnarztliche implantologie</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment surgery</term>
<term>Arztliche implantologie</term>
<term>Astra</term>
<term>Astra implants</term>
<term>Astra tech</term>
<term>Basal bone</term>
<term>Baseline</term>
<term>Bone quality</term>
<term>Bone quantity</term>
<term>Cancellous bone</term>
<term>Catholic university</term>
<term>Clinical picture</term>
<term>Compact bone</term>
<term>Cumulative success rates</term>
<term>Different implant</term>
<term>Different implant surfaces</term>
<term>Edentulous</term>
<term>Edentulous mandible</term>
<term>Edentulous mandibles</term>
<term>Edentulous patients</term>
<term>Endosseous implants</term>
<term>Hard tissues</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Implant lengths</term>
<term>Implant surgery</term>
<term>Implant system</term>
<term>Implant systems</term>
<term>Implants research</term>
<term>International journal</term>
<term>Lekholm</term>
<term>Long terme</term>
<term>Lower jaws</term>
<term>Machined</term>
<term>Machined surface</term>
<term>Machined surface irregularities</term>
<term>Machined surfaces</term>
<term>Marginal bone level</term>
<term>Marginal bone loss</term>
<term>Maxillofacial</term>
<term>Maxillofacial implants</term>
<term>Maxillofacial surgery</term>
<term>More years</term>
<term>Niveau osseux</term>
<term>Nobel biocare</term>
<term>Osseointegrated implants</term>
<term>Patient selection</term>
<term>Periodontal parameters</term>
<term>Plaque</term>
<term>Plaque accumulation</term>
<term>Pocket depth</term>
<term>Prospective multicenter study</term>
<term>Prospective study</term>
<term>Prosthesis</term>
<term>Prosthetic</term>
<term>Prosthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Prosthetic point</term>
<term>Pure titanium</term>
<term>Pure titanium implant systems</term>
<term>Same patient</term>
<term>Same sites</term>
<term>Selftapping</term>
<term>Selftapping implants</term>
<term>Selftapping mark</term>
<term>Steenberghe</term>
<term>Success rate</term>
<term>Surface roughening</term>
<term>Surgery time</term>
<term>Thin layer</term>
<term>Titanium</term>
<term>Upper jaws astra</term>
<term>Zahnarztliche implantologie</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Titane</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Clinical data indicate different medium and long‐term outcomes of endosseous implants for different implant configurations and in particular implant surfaces. The present study compares 2 very similar implant systems but with different surface characteristics in a split‐mouth‐randomized design. The Astra‐Tech (A) system (Astra‐Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden) consisted of selftapping TiO2‐blasted screw‐shaped implants made of commercially pure titanium, and the Brånemark (B) System (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) comprised selftapping Mark II implants with machined surface irregularities. Throughout the 2‐years' observation period, no significant differences could be found concerning probing depths, presence of plaque or change in marginal bone level. A statistically significant difference in location of the marginal bone level in relation to the shoulder of the implant was found in favor of the A system both at baseline and after 2 years. Cumulative success rates of 100% (A) and 97.7% (B) were not statistically different. From a prosthetic point of view, more soldering points were needed for A compared to B to reach clinical acceptable fit. More years of observation are needed to compare the fate of the soft and hard tissues surrounding two different implant surfaces.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Main/Merge
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 009423 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Merge/biblio.hfd -nk 009423 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= Main |étape= Merge |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:EC9A8B6A1141DBA3B1DFBA2DB7CFA9F03DAE1037 |texte= A prospective split‐mouth comparative study of two screw‐shaped self‐tapping pure titanium implant systems }}
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. | ![]() |