EdenteV2, PascalFrancis, Corpus, bibRecord, 000670

A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion

Identifieur interne : 000670 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000669; suivant : 000671

A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion

Auteurs : Kees Heydenrijk ; Gerry M. Raghoebar ; Rutger H. K. Batenburg ; Boudewijn Stegenga ; Dennis P. Tarnow

Source :

Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery [ 0278-2391 ] ; 2000.

RBID : Pascal:01-0002054

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Edentation, Traitement, Chirurgie, Implant, Etude comparative, Incision chirurgicale, Voie abord, Lambeau, Biomatériau, Mandibule, Technique, Complication, Postopératoire, Muqueuse, Cavité buccale, Efficacité traitement, Morbidité, Adulte, Partie molle, Arcade dentaire, Etude pilote.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Adult, Biomaterial, Comparative study, Complication, Dental arch, Edentulousness, Flap (surgery), Implant, Mandible, Morbidity, Mucosa, Oral cavity, Pilot study, Postoperative, Soft tissue, Surgery, Surgical approach, Surgical incision, Technique, Treatment, Treatment efficiency.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0278-2391`
A02	`01`			`@0 JOMSDA`
A03		`1`		`@0 J. oral maxillofac. surg.`
A05				`@2 58`
A06				`@2 10`
A08	`01`	`1`	`ENG`	`@1 A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 HEYDENRIJK (Kees)`
A11	`02`	`1`		`@1 RAGHOEBAR (Gerry M.)`
A11	`03`	`1`		`@1 BATENBURG (Rutger H. K.)`
A11	`04`	`1`		`@1 STEGENGA (Boudewijn)`
A11	`05`	`1`		`@1 TARNOW (Dennis P.) @9 comment.`
A14	`01`			`@1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen @3 NLD @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 4 aut.`
A14	`02`			`@1 Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry @2 New York New York @3 USA @Z 5 aut.`
A20				`@1 1119-1124`
A21				`@1 2000`
A23	`01`			`@0 ENG`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 3005 @5 354000092735420060`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2001 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A45				`@0 23 ref.`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 01-0002054`
A60				`@1 P @3 AR @3 CT`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery`
A66	`01`			`@0 USA`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.
C02	`01`	`X`		`@0 002B25C02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Edentation @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Edentulousness @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Edentación @5 01`
C03	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Traitement @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Treatment @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Tratamiento @5 02`
C03	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Chirurgie @5 03`
C03	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Surgery @5 03`
C03	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cirugía @5 03`
C03	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Implant @5 04`
C03	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Implant @5 04`
C03	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Implante @5 04`
C03	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Etude comparative @5 05`
C03	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Comparative study @5 05`
C03	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Estudio comparativo @5 05`
C03	`06`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Incision chirurgicale @5 06`
C03	`06`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Surgical incision @5 06`
C03	`06`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Incisión quirúrgica @5 06`
C03	`07`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Voie abord @5 07`
C03	`07`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Surgical approach @5 07`
C03	`07`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Vía abordaje @5 07`
C03	`08`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Lambeau @5 08`
C03	`08`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Flap (surgery) @5 08`
C03	`08`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Colgajo @5 08`
C03	`09`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Biomatériau @5 09`
C03	`09`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Biomaterial @5 09`
C03	`09`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Biomaterial @5 09`
C03	`10`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Mandibule @5 10`
C03	`10`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Mandible @5 10`
C03	`10`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Mandíbula @5 10`
C03	`11`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Technique @5 11`
C03	`11`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Technique @5 11`
C03	`11`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Técnica @5 11`
C03	`12`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Complication @5 12`
C03	`12`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Complication @5 12`
C03	`12`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Complicación @5 12`
C03	`13`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Postopératoire @5 13`
C03	`13`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Postoperative @5 13`
C03	`13`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Postoperatorio @5 13`
C03	`14`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Muqueuse @5 17`
C03	`14`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Mucosa @5 17`
C03	`14`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Mucosa @5 17`
C03	`15`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Cavité buccale @5 18`
C03	`15`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Oral cavity @5 18`
C03	`15`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cavidad bucal @5 18`
C03	`16`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Efficacité traitement @5 19`
C03	`16`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Treatment efficiency @5 19`
C03	`16`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Eficacia tratamiento @5 19`
C03	`17`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Morbidité @5 20`
C03	`17`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Morbidity @5 20`
C03	`17`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Morbilidad @5 20`
C03	`18`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Adulte @5 21`
C03	`18`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Adult @5 21`
C03	`18`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Adulto @5 21`
C03	`19`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Partie molle @5 22`
C03	`19`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Soft tissue @5 22`
C03	`19`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Parte blanda @5 22`
C03	`20`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Arcade dentaire @5 23`
C03	`20`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Dental arch @5 23`
C03	`20`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Arcada dental @5 23`
C03	`21`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Etude pilote @4 CD @5 96`
C03	`21`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Pilot study @4 CD @5 96`
C07	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Homme`
C07	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Human`
C07	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Hombre`
C07	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Stomatologie @5 37`
C07	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Stomatology @5 37`
C07	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Estomatología @5 37`
C07	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Dent pathologie @5 38`
C07	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Dental disease @5 38`
C07	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Diente patología @5 38`
C07	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 ORL pathologie @5 40`
C07	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 ENT disease @5 40`
C07	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 ORL patología @5 40`
C07	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Génie biomédical @5 45`
C07	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Biomedical engineering @5 45`
C07	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Ingeniería biomédica @5 45`
N21				`@1 001`

Format Inist (serveur)

NO :	PASCAL 01-0002054 INIST
ET :	A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion
AU :	HEYDENRIJK (Kees); RAGHOEBAR (Gerry M.); BATENBURG (Rutger H. K.); STEGENGA (Boudewijn); TARNOW (Dennis P.)
AF :	Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen/Pays-Bas (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry/New York New York/Etats-Unis (5 aut.)
DT :	Publication en série; Article; Commentaire; Niveau analytique
SO :	Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery; ISSN 0278-2391; Coden JOMSDA; Etats-Unis; Da. 2000; Vol. 58; No. 10; Pp. 1119-1124; Bibl. 23 ref.
LA :	Anglais
EA :	Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.
CC :	002B25C02
FD :	Edentation; Traitement; Chirurgie; Implant; Etude comparative; Incision chirurgicale; Voie abord; Lambeau; Biomatériau; Mandibule; Technique; Complication; Postopératoire; Muqueuse; Cavité buccale; Efficacité traitement; Morbidité; Adulte; Partie molle; Arcade dentaire; Etude pilote
FG :	Homme; Stomatologie; Dent pathologie; ORL pathologie; Génie biomédical
ED :	Edentulousness; Treatment; Surgery; Implant; Comparative study; Surgical incision; Surgical approach; Flap (surgery); Biomaterial; Mandible; Technique; Complication; Postoperative; Mucosa; Oral cavity; Treatment efficiency; Morbidity; Adult; Soft tissue; Dental arch; Pilot study
EG :	Human; Stomatology; Dental disease; ENT disease; Biomedical engineering
SD :	Edentación; Tratamiento; Cirugía; Implante; Estudio comparativo; Incisión quirúrgica; Vía abordaje; Colgajo; Biomaterial; Mandíbula; Técnica; Complicación; Postoperatorio; Mucosa; Cavidad bucal; Eficacia tratamiento; Morbilidad; Adulto; Parte blanda; Arcada dental
LO :	INIST-3005.354000092735420060
ID :	01-0002054

Links to Exploration step

Pascal:01-0002054

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion</title>
<author><name sortKey="Heydenrijk, Kees" sort="Heydenrijk, Kees" uniqKey="Heydenrijk K" first="Kees" last="Heydenrijk">Kees Heydenrijk</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Raghoebar, Gerry M" sort="Raghoebar, Gerry M" uniqKey="Raghoebar G" first="Gerry M." last="Raghoebar">Gerry M. Raghoebar</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Batenburg, Rutger H K" sort="Batenburg, Rutger H K" uniqKey="Batenburg R" first="Rutger H. K." last="Batenburg">Rutger H. K. Batenburg</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Stegenga, Boudewijn" sort="Stegenga, Boudewijn" uniqKey="Stegenga B" first="Boudewijn" last="Stegenga">Boudewijn Stegenga</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Tarnow, Dennis P" sort="Tarnow, Dennis P" uniqKey="Tarnow D" first="Dennis P." last="Tarnow">Dennis P. Tarnow</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry</s1>
<s2>New York New York</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">01-0002054</idno>
<date when="2000">2000</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 01-0002054 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:01-0002054</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000670</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion</title>
<author><name sortKey="Heydenrijk, Kees" sort="Heydenrijk, Kees" uniqKey="Heydenrijk K" first="Kees" last="Heydenrijk">Kees Heydenrijk</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Raghoebar, Gerry M" sort="Raghoebar, Gerry M" uniqKey="Raghoebar G" first="Gerry M." last="Raghoebar">Gerry M. Raghoebar</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Batenburg, Rutger H K" sort="Batenburg, Rutger H K" uniqKey="Batenburg R" first="Rutger H. K." last="Batenburg">Rutger H. K. Batenburg</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Stegenga, Boudewijn" sort="Stegenga, Boudewijn" uniqKey="Stegenga B" first="Boudewijn" last="Stegenga">Boudewijn Stegenga</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Tarnow, Dennis P" sort="Tarnow, Dennis P" uniqKey="Tarnow D" first="Dennis P." last="Tarnow">Dennis P. Tarnow</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry</s1>
<s2>New York New York</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. oral maxillofac. surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0278-2391</idno>
<imprint><date when="2000">2000</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. oral maxillofac. surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0278-2391</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term>
<term>Biomaterial</term>
<term>Comparative study</term>
<term>Complication</term>
<term>Dental arch</term>
<term>Edentulousness</term>
<term>Flap (surgery)</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Mandible</term>
<term>Morbidity</term>
<term>Mucosa</term>
<term>Oral cavity</term>
<term>Pilot study</term>
<term>Postoperative</term>
<term>Soft tissue</term>
<term>Surgery</term>
<term>Surgical approach</term>
<term>Surgical incision</term>
<term>Technique</term>
<term>Treatment</term>
<term>Treatment efficiency</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Edentation</term>
<term>Traitement</term>
<term>Chirurgie</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Etude comparative</term>
<term>Incision chirurgicale</term>
<term>Voie abord</term>
<term>Lambeau</term>
<term>Biomatériau</term>
<term>Mandibule</term>
<term>Technique</term>
<term>Complication</term>
<term>Postopératoire</term>
<term>Muqueuse</term>
<term>Cavité buccale</term>
<term>Efficacité traitement</term>
<term>Morbidité</term>
<term>Adulte</term>
<term>Partie molle</term>
<term>Arcade dentaire</term>
<term>Etude pilote</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0278-2391</s0>
</fA01>
<fA02 i1="01"><s0>JOMSDA</s0>
</fA02>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>J. oral maxillofac. surg.</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>58</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>10</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>HEYDENRIJK (Kees)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>RAGHOEBAR (Gerry M.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>BATENBURG (Rutger H. K.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="04" i2="1"><s1>STEGENGA (Boudewijn)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="05" i2="1"><s1>TARNOW (Dennis P.)</s1>
<s9>comment.</s9>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen</s1>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry</s1>
<s2>New York New York</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>1119-1124</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2000</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>3005</s2>
<s5>354000092735420060</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2001 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45><s0>23 ref.</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>01-0002054</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
<s3>AR</s3>
<s3>CT</s3>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>USA</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B25C02</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Edentation</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Edentulousness</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Edentación</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Traitement</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Treatment</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Tratamiento</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Chirurgie</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgery</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cirugía</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Implant</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Implant</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Implante</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Etude comparative</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Comparative study</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estudio comparativo</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Incision chirurgicale</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgical incision</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Incisión quirúrgica</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Voie abord</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgical approach</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Vía abordaje</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Lambeau</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Flap (surgery)</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Colgajo</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Biomatériau</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Biomaterial</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Biomaterial</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Mandibule</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Mandible</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Mandíbula</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Technique</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Technique</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Técnica</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Complication</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Complication</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Complicación</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Postopératoire</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Postoperative</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Postoperatorio</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="14" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Muqueuse</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="14" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Mucosa</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="14" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Mucosa</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="15" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Cavité buccale</s0>
<s5>18</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="15" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Oral cavity</s0>
<s5>18</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="15" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cavidad bucal</s0>
<s5>18</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="16" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Efficacité traitement</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="16" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Treatment efficiency</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="16" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Eficacia tratamiento</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="17" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Morbidité</s0>
<s5>20</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="17" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Morbidity</s0>
<s5>20</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="17" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Morbilidad</s0>
<s5>20</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="18" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Adulte</s0>
<s5>21</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="18" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Adult</s0>
<s5>21</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="18" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Adulto</s0>
<s5>21</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="19" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Partie molle</s0>
<s5>22</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="19" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Soft tissue</s0>
<s5>22</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="19" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Parte blanda</s0>
<s5>22</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="20" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Arcade dentaire</s0>
<s5>23</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="20" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Dental arch</s0>
<s5>23</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="20" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Arcada dental</s0>
<s5>23</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="21" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Etude pilote</s0>
<s4>CD</s4>
<s5>96</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="21" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Pilot study</s0>
<s4>CD</s4>
<s5>96</s5>
</fC03>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Homme</s0>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Human</s0>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombre</s0>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Stomatologie</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Stomatology</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estomatología</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Dent pathologie</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Dental disease</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Diente patología</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>ORL pathologie</s0>
<s5>40</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>ENT disease</s0>
<s5>40</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>ORL patología</s0>
<s5>40</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Génie biomédical</s0>
<s5>45</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Biomedical engineering</s0>
<s5>45</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Ingeniería biomédica</s0>
<s5>45</s5>
</fC07>
<fN21><s1>001</s1>
</fN21>
</pA>
</standard>
<server><NO>PASCAL 01-0002054 INIST</NO>
<ET>A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion</ET>
<AU>HEYDENRIJK (Kees); RAGHOEBAR (Gerry M.); BATENBURG (Rutger H. K.); STEGENGA (Boudewijn); TARNOW (Dennis P.)</AU>
<AF>Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen/Pays-Bas (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Department of Implant Dentistry NYU College of Dentistry/New York New York/Etats-Unis (5 aut.)</AF>
<DT>Publication en série; Article; Commentaire; Niveau analytique</DT>
<SO>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery; ISSN 0278-2391; Coden JOMSDA; Etats-Unis; Da. 2000; Vol. 58; No. 10; Pp. 1119-1124; Bibl. 23 ref.</SO>
<LA>Anglais</LA>
<EA>Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the crestal incision with the labial flap design when inserting a 2-stage implant system in a nonsubmerged manner. Patients and Methods: Ten consecutive edentulous patients with a severely resorbed mandible (Cawood Class V to VI) that resulted in reduced stability and insufficient retention of the lower denture were included. In all patients, 2 IMZ implants were inserted in a 1-stage procedure in the mandibular canine regions as part of an implant overdenture treatment. In 5 patients, the labial flap approach was used, and a crestal incision approach was used in the other 5 patients. Standardized evaluations were performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after implant placement and 12 months after placement of the new prosthesis. Results: In the first postoperative weeks, more hyperplasia occurred around the implants inserted by the crestal incision than the labial flap. However, after 1 year of function, no striking differences between the 2 groups were present with regard to the clinical and radiographic parameters. Conclusions: From this pilot study, it was concluded that both the crestal incision and the labial flap approach are reliable procedures for insertion of IMZ implants in a 1-stage procedure. However, because of the smaller risk of soft tissue overgrowth, there is a preference for the labial flap approach.</EA>
<CC>002B25C02</CC>
<FD>Edentation; Traitement; Chirurgie; Implant; Etude comparative; Incision chirurgicale; Voie abord; Lambeau; Biomatériau; Mandibule; Technique; Complication; Postopératoire; Muqueuse; Cavité buccale; Efficacité traitement; Morbidité; Adulte; Partie molle; Arcade dentaire; Etude pilote</FD>
<FG>Homme; Stomatologie; Dent pathologie; ORL pathologie; Génie biomédical</FG>
<ED>Edentulousness; Treatment; Surgery; Implant; Comparative study; Surgical incision; Surgical approach; Flap (surgery); Biomaterial; Mandible; Technique; Complication; Postoperative; Mucosa; Oral cavity; Treatment efficiency; Morbidity; Adult; Soft tissue; Dental arch; Pilot study</ED>
<EG>Human; Stomatology; Dental disease; ENT disease; Biomedical engineering</EG>
<SD>Edentación; Tratamiento; Cirugía; Implante; Estudio comparativo; Incisión quirúrgica; Vía abordaje; Colgajo; Biomaterial; Mandíbula; Técnica; Complicación; Postoperatorio; Mucosa; Cavidad bucal; Eficacia tratamiento; Morbilidad; Adulto; Parte blanda; Arcada dental</SD>
<LO>INIST-3005.354000092735420060</LO>
<ID>01-0002054</ID>
</server>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000670 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000670 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Santé
   |area=    EdenteV2
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:01-0002054
   |texte=   A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022

	Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion

A comparison of labial and crestal incisions for the 1-stage placement of IMZ implants : A pilot study. Discussion

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Format Inist (serveur)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri