Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.
Identifieur interne : 003376 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 003375; suivant : 003377Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.
Auteurs : T. Lindh ; T. B Ck ; E. Nyström ; J. GunneSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2001.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bone Resorption (etiology), Dental Abutments, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture Design, Denture, Partial, Fixed, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation), Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery), Life Tables, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Maxilla (surgery), Maxillary Diseases (etiology), Middle Aged, Sample Size, Statistics as Topic, Statistics, Nonparametric, Stress, Mechanical, Survival Analysis, Tooth, Weight-Bearing.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- etiology : Bone Resorption, Maxillary Diseases.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially, Maxilla.
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dental Abutments, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Restoration Failure, Denture Design, Denture, Partial, Fixed, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Life Tables, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Sample Size, Statistics as Topic, Statistics, Nonparametric, Stress, Mechanical, Survival Analysis, Tooth, Weight-Bearing.
Abstract
When implants are used for restoration of a jaw with a residual dentition, the possibility of combining implants with natural abutments may be considered. In a longitudinal comparative study, 26 patients (15 women & 11 men, age 49-84 years) with residual anterior dentitions were treated with two different designs of fixed partial dentures bilaterally in the posterior maxilla. On one side the reconstruction was supported by implants only, while on the contralateral side an implant and a tooth in combination were used. The patients were followed at intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after loading of the implants. 95 implants were placed, of which 11 non-loaded. A total of 10 implants failed, 7 prior to loading and three within the first three months of service (88.0+/-SE 6.7% cumulative survival for tested implants after two years' follow-up). There was no difference in failure rate for the implants in the two different prosthesis designs. The total mean loss of marginal bone height close to the implants was within acceptable standards, but was more pronounced at the implants not combined with teeth. The results indicate a correlation between the prosthesis design and the loss of marginal bone.
PubMed: 11564103
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:11564103Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.</title><author><name sortKey="Lindh, T" sort="Lindh, T" uniqKey="Lindh T" first="T" last="Lindh">T. Lindh</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Odontology, Umeå University, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden. tomas.lindh@odont.umu.se</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="B Ck, T" sort="B Ck, T" uniqKey="B Ck T" first="T" last="B Ck">T. B Ck</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nystrom, E" sort="Nystrom, E" uniqKey="Nystrom E" first="E" last="Nyström">E. Nyström</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gunne, J" sort="Gunne, J" uniqKey="Gunne J" first="J" last="Gunne">J. Gunne</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2001">2001</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:11564103</idno><idno type="pmid">11564103</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">003376</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">003376</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.</title><author><name sortKey="Lindh, T" sort="Lindh, T" uniqKey="Lindh T" first="T" last="Lindh">T. Lindh</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Odontology, Umeå University, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden. tomas.lindh@odont.umu.se</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="B Ck, T" sort="B Ck, T" uniqKey="B Ck T" first="T" last="B Ck">T. B Ck</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nystrom, E" sort="Nystrom, E" uniqKey="Nystrom E" first="E" last="Nyström">E. Nyström</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gunne, J" sort="Gunne, J" uniqKey="Gunne J" first="J" last="Gunne">J. Gunne</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Clinical oral implants research</title><idno type="ISSN">0905-7161</idno><imprint><date when="2001" type="published">2001</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Bone Resorption (etiology)</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture Design</term><term>Denture, Partial, Fixed</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery)</term><term>Life Tables</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Maxilla (surgery)</term><term>Maxillary Diseases (etiology)</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Sample Size</term><term>Statistics as Topic</term><term>Statistics, Nonparametric</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term><term>Survival Analysis</term><term>Tooth</term><term>Weight-Bearing</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="etiology" xml:lang="en"><term>Bone Resorption</term><term>Maxillary Diseases</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="surgery" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</term><term>Maxilla</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Restoration Failure</term><term>Denture Design</term><term>Denture, Partial, Fixed</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Life Tables</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Sample Size</term><term>Statistics as Topic</term><term>Statistics, Nonparametric</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term><term>Survival Analysis</term><term>Tooth</term><term>Weight-Bearing</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">When implants are used for restoration of a jaw with a residual dentition, the possibility of combining implants with natural abutments may be considered. In a longitudinal comparative study, 26 patients (15 women & 11 men, age 49-84 years) with residual anterior dentitions were treated with two different designs of fixed partial dentures bilaterally in the posterior maxilla. On one side the reconstruction was supported by implants only, while on the contralateral side an implant and a tooth in combination were used. The patients were followed at intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after loading of the implants. 95 implants were placed, of which 11 non-loaded. A total of 10 implants failed, 7 prior to loading and three within the first three months of service (88.0+/-SE 6.7% cumulative survival for tested implants after two years' follow-up). There was no difference in failure rate for the implants in the two different prosthesis designs. The total mean loss of marginal bone height close to the implants was within acceptable standards, but was more pronounced at the implants not combined with teeth. The results indicate a correlation between the prosthesis design and the loss of marginal bone.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">11564103</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2001</Year><Month>12</Month><Day>17</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2007</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>15</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0905-7161</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>12</Volume><Issue>5</Issue><PubDate><Year>2001</Year><Month>Oct</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Clinical oral implants research</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Clin Oral Implants Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>441-9</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText>When implants are used for restoration of a jaw with a residual dentition, the possibility of combining implants with natural abutments may be considered. In a longitudinal comparative study, 26 patients (15 women & 11 men, age 49-84 years) with residual anterior dentitions were treated with two different designs of fixed partial dentures bilaterally in the posterior maxilla. On one side the reconstruction was supported by implants only, while on the contralateral side an implant and a tooth in combination were used. The patients were followed at intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after loading of the implants. 95 implants were placed, of which 11 non-loaded. A total of 10 implants failed, 7 prior to loading and three within the first three months of service (88.0+/-SE 6.7% cumulative survival for tested implants after two years' follow-up). There was no difference in failure rate for the implants in the two different prosthesis designs. The total mean loss of marginal bone height close to the implants was within acceptable standards, but was more pronounced at the implants not combined with teeth. The results indicate a correlation between the prosthesis design and the loss of marginal bone.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Lindh</LastName><ForeName>T</ForeName><Initials>T</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Odontology, Umeå University, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden. tomas.lindh@odont.umu.se</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Bäck</LastName><ForeName>T</ForeName><Initials>T</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Nyström</LastName><ForeName>E</ForeName><Initials>E</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Gunne</LastName><ForeName>J</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D013485">Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't</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="D000368" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000369" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged, 80 and over</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D001862" MajorTopicYN="N">Bone Resorption</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000209" MajorTopicYN="N">etiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000044" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Abutments</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="Y">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="D003779" MajorTopicYN="N">Denture Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003830" MajorTopicYN="N">Denture, Partial, Fixed</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005500" MajorTopicYN="N">Follow-Up Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007576" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="N">rehabilitation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="Y">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015993" MajorTopicYN="N">Life Tables</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008137" MajorTopicYN="N">Longitudinal Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008437" MajorTopicYN="N">Maxilla</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="Y">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008439" MajorTopicYN="N">Maxillary Diseases</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000209" MajorTopicYN="N">etiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018401" MajorTopicYN="N">Sample Size</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013223" MajorTopicYN="N">Statistics as Topic</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018709" MajorTopicYN="N">Statistics, Nonparametric</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013314" MajorTopicYN="N">Stress, Mechanical</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016019" MajorTopicYN="N">Survival Analysis</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D014070" MajorTopicYN="Y">Tooth</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016474" MajorTopicYN="N">Weight-Bearing</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2001</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>21</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2002</Year><Month>1</Month><Day>5</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2001</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>21</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">11564103</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">clr120503</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 003376 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 003376 | 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:11564103
|texte= Implant versus tooth-implant supported prostheses in the posterior maxilla: a 2-year report.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:11564103" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |