Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.
Identifieur interne : 001508 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 001507; suivant : 001509Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.
Auteurs : Torsten Jemt ; Victoria StenportSource :
- The International journal of prosthodontics [ 0893-2174 ]
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- MESH :
Abstract
Implant treatment using osseointegrated implants has been performed for more than 40 years, but limited knowledge is available on how treatment outcomes have changed over time. The aim of this study was to report and compare the prosthetic treatment outcomes from two patient cohorts provided with fixed implant prostheses in the edentulous maxilla between 1986 and 1987 (early) and 2001 to 2004 (late) at the same clinic.
PubMed: 21716974
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:21716974Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.</title><author><name sortKey="Jemt, Torsten" sort="Jemt, Torsten" uniqKey="Jemt T" first="Torsten" last="Jemt">Torsten Jemt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stenport, Victoria" sort="Stenport, Victoria" uniqKey="Stenport V" first="Victoria" last="Stenport">Victoria Stenport</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="????"><PubDate><MedlineDate>2011 Jul-Aug</MedlineDate></PubDate></date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:21716974</idno><idno type="pmid">21716974</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">001508</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">001508</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.</title><author><name sortKey="Jemt, Torsten" sort="Jemt, Torsten" uniqKey="Jemt T" first="Torsten" last="Jemt">Torsten Jemt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stenport, Victoria" sort="Stenport, Victoria" uniqKey="Stenport V" first="Victoria" last="Stenport">Victoria Stenport</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">The International journal of prosthodontics</title><idno type="ISSN">0893-2174</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term><term>Maxilla</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term><term>Maxilla</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Implant treatment using osseointegrated implants has been performed for more than 40 years, but limited knowledge is available on how treatment outcomes have changed over time. The aim of this study was to report and compare the prosthetic treatment outcomes from two patient cohorts provided with fixed implant prostheses in the edentulous maxilla between 1986 and 1987 (early) and 2001 to 2004 (late) at the same clinic.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">21716974</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2016</Year><Month>04</Month><Day>23</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2011</Year><Month>06</Month><Day>30</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0893-2174</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>24</Volume><Issue>4</Issue><PubDate><MedlineDate>2011 Jul-Aug</MedlineDate></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>The International journal of prosthodontics</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Int J Prosthodont</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>356-62</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText Label="PURPOSE" NlmCategory="OBJECTIVE">Implant treatment using osseointegrated implants has been performed for more than 40 years, but limited knowledge is available on how treatment outcomes have changed over time. The aim of this study was to report and compare the prosthetic treatment outcomes from two patient cohorts provided with fixed implant prostheses in the edentulous maxilla between 1986 and 1987 (early) and 2001 to 2004 (late) at the same clinic.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="MATERIALS AND METHODS" NlmCategory="METHODS">The two groups of patients comprised 76 and 109 edentulous patients consecutively provided with 450 and 670 Branemark System implants and fixed screw-retained prostheses, respectively. Both groups were followed for 5 years with regard to prosthetic treatment, clinical maintenance, and complications.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="RESULTS" NlmCategory="RESULTS">Altogether, 37 patients (20%) were lost to follow-up during the 5 years, and more patients were noncompliant in the late group (P < .05). Prosthetic treatment was performed using significantly less chair time in the late group (P < .05), and 22 and 68 patients were followed for 5 years without any reported complications in the early and late groups, respectively (P < .05). The 5-year prosthesis cumulative survival rate was 97.1% in the early group and 100.0% in the late group. Patients in the late group presented fewer problems with diction and veneer fractures, and fewer patients had their prostheses temporarily removed for adjustments (P < .05).</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="CONCLUSION" NlmCategory="CONCLUSIONS">Prosthetic treatment and maintenance of implant-supported fixed prostheses improved significantly between the groups. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:356-362.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Jemt</LastName><ForeName>Torsten</ForeName><Initials>T</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Stenport</LastName><ForeName>Victoria</ForeName><Initials>V</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>United States</Country><MedlineTA>Int J Prosthodont</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>8900938</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0893-2174</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance></Chemical></ChemicalList><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implants</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019232" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Restoration Failure</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008437" MajorTopicYN="Y">Maxilla</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2011</Year><Month>7</Month><Day>1</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2011</Year><Month>7</Month><Day>1</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2016</Year><Month>4</Month><Day>24</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">21716974</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PubMed/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001508 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001508 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= PubMed
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:21716974
|texte= Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 2: prosthetic technique and clinical maintenance in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:21716974" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |