Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.
Identifieur interne : 002D78 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 002D77; suivant : 002D79Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.
Auteurs : Youji Miyamoto ; Kenji Fujisawa ; Masaaki Takechi ; Yukihiro Momota ; Tetsuya Yuasa ; Seiko Tatehara ; Masaru Nagayama ; Eiji YamauchiSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2003.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adult, Aged, Bite Force, Dental Implantation, Endosseous (methods), Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported (methods), Dental Restoration Failure, Denture, Complete, Lower, Female, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation), Jaw, Edentulous (surgery), Male, Mandible, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Stress, Mechanical.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- methods : Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous.
- Adult, Aged, Bite Force, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture, Complete, Lower, Female, Humans, Male, Mandible, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Stress, Mechanical.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to elucidate the effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw. Fifteen patients who had received implants (Brånemark system, Nobel Biocare, Gotebörg, Sweden) in the edentulous mandible and completed a 1-year follow-up after the fitting of implant-anchored fixed prostheses were selected. In seven patients (Group A), four or five implants were installed between the mental foramina, and in eight patients (Group P), one or two implants, one on each side, were installed in the posterior regions in addition to the implants between the foramina. All implants of both groups achieved osseointegration. In Group A, there was no implant loss after loading. Six implants were lost in five patients of Group P within 1 year after loading. All of them were located in the posterior region. To elucidate whether or not the failure rate of the implants in the posterior region of Group P after loading was especially high, the failures were also compared with 89 implants, which were installed in the posterior region of the mandibles to support implant-anchored fixed partial prosthesis, during the same period (Group C). The cumulative survival rate of the implants of Group P was 60%, while that of the implants of Group C was 100% (P<0.001). When the survival rates of posterior implants with the same length of the two groups were compared, there were significant differences for the 7- and 10-mm-length implants only. These data demonstrate that the posterior implants in Group P are at greater risk. Deformation of the mandible due to jaw movement was thought to be the most likely cause of the implant loss. Therefore, when such modified treatment is chosen, it should be performed with meticulous attention.
PubMed: 15015949
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:15015949Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.</title><author><name sortKey="Miyamoto, Youji" sort="Miyamoto, Youji" uniqKey="Miyamoto Y" first="Youji" last="Miyamoto">Youji Miyamoto</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>First Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Tokushima, Tokushima, Japan. miyamoto@dent.tokushima-u.ac.jp</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Fujisawa, Kenji" sort="Fujisawa, Kenji" uniqKey="Fujisawa K" first="Kenji" last="Fujisawa">Kenji Fujisawa</name></author><author><name sortKey="Takechi, Masaaki" sort="Takechi, Masaaki" uniqKey="Takechi M" first="Masaaki" last="Takechi">Masaaki Takechi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Momota, Yukihiro" sort="Momota, Yukihiro" uniqKey="Momota Y" first="Yukihiro" last="Momota">Yukihiro Momota</name></author><author><name sortKey="Yuasa, Tetsuya" sort="Yuasa, Tetsuya" uniqKey="Yuasa T" first="Tetsuya" last="Yuasa">Tetsuya Yuasa</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tatehara, Seiko" sort="Tatehara, Seiko" uniqKey="Tatehara S" first="Seiko" last="Tatehara">Seiko Tatehara</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nagayama, Masaru" sort="Nagayama, Masaru" uniqKey="Nagayama M" first="Masaru" last="Nagayama">Masaru Nagayama</name></author><author><name sortKey="Yamauchi, Eiji" sort="Yamauchi, Eiji" uniqKey="Yamauchi E" first="Eiji" last="Yamauchi">Eiji Yamauchi</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2003">2003</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:15015949</idno><idno type="pmid">15015949</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">002D78</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">002D78</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.</title><author><name sortKey="Miyamoto, Youji" sort="Miyamoto, Youji" uniqKey="Miyamoto Y" first="Youji" last="Miyamoto">Youji Miyamoto</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>First Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Tokushima, Tokushima, Japan. miyamoto@dent.tokushima-u.ac.jp</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Fujisawa, Kenji" sort="Fujisawa, Kenji" uniqKey="Fujisawa K" first="Kenji" last="Fujisawa">Kenji Fujisawa</name></author><author><name sortKey="Takechi, Masaaki" sort="Takechi, Masaaki" uniqKey="Takechi M" first="Masaaki" last="Takechi">Masaaki Takechi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Momota, Yukihiro" sort="Momota, Yukihiro" uniqKey="Momota Y" first="Yukihiro" last="Momota">Yukihiro Momota</name></author><author><name sortKey="Yuasa, Tetsuya" sort="Yuasa, Tetsuya" uniqKey="Yuasa T" first="Tetsuya" last="Yuasa">Tetsuya Yuasa</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tatehara, Seiko" sort="Tatehara, Seiko" uniqKey="Tatehara S" first="Seiko" last="Tatehara">Seiko Tatehara</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nagayama, Masaru" sort="Nagayama, Masaru" uniqKey="Nagayama M" first="Masaru" last="Nagayama">Masaru Nagayama</name></author><author><name sortKey="Yamauchi, Eiji" sort="Yamauchi, Eiji" uniqKey="Yamauchi E" first="Eiji" last="Yamauchi">Eiji Yamauchi</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Clinical oral implants research</title><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno><imprint><date when="2003" type="published">2003</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Bite Force</term><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous (methods)</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported (methods)</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture, Complete, Lower</term><term>Female</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (surgery)</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="methods" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="surgery" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Bite Force</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture, Complete, Lower</term><term>Female</term><term>Humans</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The aim of this study was to elucidate the effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw. Fifteen patients who had received implants (Brånemark system, Nobel Biocare, Gotebörg, Sweden) in the edentulous mandible and completed a 1-year follow-up after the fitting of implant-anchored fixed prostheses were selected. In seven patients (Group A), four or five implants were installed between the mental foramina, and in eight patients (Group P), one or two implants, one on each side, were installed in the posterior regions in addition to the implants between the foramina. All implants of both groups achieved osseointegration. In Group A, there was no implant loss after loading. Six implants were lost in five patients of Group P within 1 year after loading. All of them were located in the posterior region. To elucidate whether or not the failure rate of the implants in the posterior region of Group P after loading was especially high, the failures were also compared with 89 implants, which were installed in the posterior region of the mandibles to support implant-anchored fixed partial prosthesis, during the same period (Group C). The cumulative survival rate of the implants of Group P was 60%, while that of the implants of Group C was 100% (P<0.001). When the survival rates of posterior implants with the same length of the two groups were compared, there were significant differences for the 7- and 10-mm-length implants only. These data demonstrate that the posterior implants in Group P are at greater risk. Deformation of the mandible due to jaw movement was thought to be the most likely cause of the implant loss. Therefore, when such modified treatment is chosen, it should be performed with meticulous attention.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">15015949</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2004</Year><Month>04</Month><Day>23</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2006</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>15</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0905-7161</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>14</Volume><Issue>6</Issue><PubDate><Year>2003</Year><Month>Dec</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Clinical oral implants research</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Clin Oral Implants Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>727-33</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText>The aim of this study was to elucidate the effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw. Fifteen patients who had received implants (Brånemark system, Nobel Biocare, Gotebörg, Sweden) in the edentulous mandible and completed a 1-year follow-up after the fitting of implant-anchored fixed prostheses were selected. In seven patients (Group A), four or five implants were installed between the mental foramina, and in eight patients (Group P), one or two implants, one on each side, were installed in the posterior regions in addition to the implants between the foramina. All implants of both groups achieved osseointegration. In Group A, there was no implant loss after loading. Six implants were lost in five patients of Group P within 1 year after loading. All of them were located in the posterior region. To elucidate whether or not the failure rate of the implants in the posterior region of Group P after loading was especially high, the failures were also compared with 89 implants, which were installed in the posterior region of the mandibles to support implant-anchored fixed partial prosthesis, during the same period (Group C). The cumulative survival rate of the implants of Group P was 60%, while that of the implants of Group C was 100% (P<0.001). When the survival rates of posterior implants with the same length of the two groups were compared, there were significant differences for the 7- and 10-mm-length implants only. These data demonstrate that the posterior implants in Group P are at greater risk. Deformation of the mandible due to jaw movement was thought to be the most likely cause of the implant loss. Therefore, when such modified treatment is chosen, it should be performed with meticulous attention.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Miyamoto</LastName><ForeName>Youji</ForeName><Initials>Y</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>First Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Tokushima, Tokushima, Japan. miyamoto@dent.tokushima-u.ac.jp</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Fujisawa</LastName><ForeName>Kenji</ForeName><Initials>K</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Takechi</LastName><ForeName>Masaaki</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Momota</LastName><ForeName>Yukihiro</ForeName><Initials>Y</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Yuasa</LastName><ForeName>Tetsuya</ForeName><Initials>T</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Tatehara</LastName><ForeName>Seiko</ForeName><Initials>S</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Nagayama</LastName><ForeName>Masaru</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Yamauchi</LastName><ForeName>Eiji</ForeName><Initials>E</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016430">Clinical Trial</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>Denmark</Country><MedlineTA>Clin Oral Implants Res</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>9105713</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0905-7161</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance></Chemical></ChemicalList><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000328" MajorTopicYN="N">Adult</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000368" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D001732" MajorTopicYN="N">Bite Force</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003758" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implantation, Endosseous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implants</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019232" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Restoration Failure</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003826" MajorTopicYN="Y">Denture, Complete, Lower</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="Y">rehabilitation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="N">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008334" MajorTopicYN="N">Mandible</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011379" MajorTopicYN="N">Prognosis</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013314" MajorTopicYN="N">Stress, Mechanical</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2004</Year><Month>3</Month><Day>16</Day><Hour>5</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2004</Year><Month>4</Month><Day>24</Day><Hour>5</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2004</Year><Month>3</Month><Day>16</Day><Hour>5</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">15015949</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">958</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 002D78 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002D78 | 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:15015949
|texte= Effect of the additional installation of implants in the posterior region on the prognosis of treatment in the edentulous mandibular jaw.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:15015949" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |