Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.
Identifieur interne : 003452 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 003451; suivant : 003453Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.
Auteurs : I E Naert ; J A Duyck ; M M Hosny ; M. Quirynen ; D. Van SteenbergheSource :
- Clinical oral implants research [ 0905-7161 ] ; 2001.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adult, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Bone Resorption (diagnostic imaging), Cohort Studies, Confidence Intervals, Dental Abutments, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Elasticity, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (diagnostic imaging), Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation), Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery), Linear Models, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Pliability, Prognosis, Radiography, Stress, Mechanical, Surface Properties, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- diagnostic imaging : Bone Resorption, Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous, Partially.
- Adult, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Cohort Studies, Confidence Intervals, Dental Abutments, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Elasticity, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Linear Models, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Pliability, Prognosis, Radiography, Stress, Mechanical, Surface Properties, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome.
Abstract
A total of 123 patients were followed between January 1983 and July 1998 with 140 tooth-implant connected prostheses. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 20 to 79 years (mean 51.8). 339 (Brånemark(R) system) implants were connected to 313 teeth. The loading time ranged from 1.5 to 15 years (mean: 6.5). 123 patients were randomly selected as a control group with freestanding implant-supported prostheses only. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 22 to 78 years (mean 52.3). The loading time for the 329 freestanding (Brånemark(R) system) implants ranged from 1.3 to 14.5 years (mean: 6.2). Evolution of the marginal bone stability around the implant in the tooth-implant connected as well as the freestanding group was studied with respect to the prognosis of the implants. Over the period from 0 to 15 years, there was significantly more marginal bone loss (0.7 mm) in tooth-implant connected versus freestanding prostheses. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found between the non-rigid tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding prostheses. However, there was a significant difference in marginal bone loss for rigid and multi-connected tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding ones. The results of this study indicate that more bone is lost around implants which are rigidly connected to teeth. This suggests that bending load, which is increased in tooth-implant connected prostheses, might be responsible for this phenomenon. These observations favor the use of freestanding prostheses whenever possible. However, the clinical significance of greater bone loss in rigid versus non-rigid connections might outweigh the annoying phenomenon of tooth intrusion in the case of non-rigid tooth connection, when connection is considered.
PubMed: 11359482
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:11359482Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.</title><author><name sortKey="Naert, I E" sort="Naert, I E" uniqKey="Naert I" first="I E" last="Naert">I E Naert</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry/BIOMAT Research Group, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. Ignace@MED.Kuleuven.ac.be</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duyck, J A" sort="Duyck, J A" uniqKey="Duyck J" first="J A" last="Duyck">J A Duyck</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hosny, M M" sort="Hosny, M M" uniqKey="Hosny M" first="M M" last="Hosny">M M Hosny</name></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, M" sort="Quirynen, M" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="M" last="Quirynen">M. Quirynen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, D" sort="Van Steenberghe, D" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="D" last="Van Steenberghe">D. Van Steenberghe</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2001">2001</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:11359482</idno><idno type="pmid">11359482</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">003452</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">003452</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.</title><author><name sortKey="Naert, I E" sort="Naert, I E" uniqKey="Naert I" first="I E" last="Naert">I E Naert</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry/BIOMAT Research Group, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. Ignace@MED.Kuleuven.ac.be</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duyck, J A" sort="Duyck, J A" uniqKey="Duyck J" first="J A" last="Duyck">J A Duyck</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hosny, M M" sort="Hosny, M M" uniqKey="Hosny M" first="M M" last="Hosny">M M Hosny</name></author><author><name sortKey="Quirynen, M" sort="Quirynen, M" uniqKey="Quirynen M" first="M" last="Quirynen">M. Quirynen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Van Steenberghe, D" sort="Van Steenberghe, D" uniqKey="Van Steenberghe D" first="D" last="Van Steenberghe">D. Van Steenberghe</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>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Analysis of Variance</term><term>Bone Resorption (diagnostic imaging)</term><term>Cohort Studies</term><term>Confidence Intervals</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Elasticity</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (diagnostic imaging)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (rehabilitation)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially (surgery)</term><term>Linear Models</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Pliability</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Radiography</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term><term>Surface Properties</term><term>Time Factors</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="diagnostic imaging" xml:lang="en"><term>Bone Resorption</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous, Partially</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></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Aged</term><term>Analysis of Variance</term><term>Cohort Studies</term><term>Confidence Intervals</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Elasticity</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Linear Models</term><term>Longitudinal Studies</term><term>Male</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Pliability</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Radiography</term><term>Stress, Mechanical</term><term>Surface Properties</term><term>Time Factors</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">A total of 123 patients were followed between January 1983 and July 1998 with 140 tooth-implant connected prostheses. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 20 to 79 years (mean 51.8). 339 (Brånemark(R) system) implants were connected to 313 teeth. The loading time ranged from 1.5 to 15 years (mean: 6.5). 123 patients were randomly selected as a control group with freestanding implant-supported prostheses only. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 22 to 78 years (mean 52.3). The loading time for the 329 freestanding (Brånemark(R) system) implants ranged from 1.3 to 14.5 years (mean: 6.2). Evolution of the marginal bone stability around the implant in the tooth-implant connected as well as the freestanding group was studied with respect to the prognosis of the implants. Over the period from 0 to 15 years, there was significantly more marginal bone loss (0.7 mm) in tooth-implant connected versus freestanding prostheses. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found between the non-rigid tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding prostheses. However, there was a significant difference in marginal bone loss for rigid and multi-connected tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding ones. The results of this study indicate that more bone is lost around implants which are rigidly connected to teeth. This suggests that bending load, which is increased in tooth-implant connected prostheses, might be responsible for this phenomenon. These observations favor the use of freestanding prostheses whenever possible. However, the clinical significance of greater bone loss in rigid versus non-rigid connections might outweigh the annoying phenomenon of tooth intrusion in the case of non-rigid tooth connection, when connection is considered.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">11359482</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2001</Year><Month>08</Month><Day>23</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2016</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>24</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0905-7161</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>12</Volume><Issue>3</Issue><PubDate><Year>2001</Year><Month>Jun</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Clinical oral implants research</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Clin Oral Implants Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>245-51</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText>A total of 123 patients were followed between January 1983 and July 1998 with 140 tooth-implant connected prostheses. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 20 to 79 years (mean 51.8). 339 (Brånemark(R) system) implants were connected to 313 teeth. The loading time ranged from 1.5 to 15 years (mean: 6.5). 123 patients were randomly selected as a control group with freestanding implant-supported prostheses only. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 22 to 78 years (mean 52.3). The loading time for the 329 freestanding (Brånemark(R) system) implants ranged from 1.3 to 14.5 years (mean: 6.2). Evolution of the marginal bone stability around the implant in the tooth-implant connected as well as the freestanding group was studied with respect to the prognosis of the implants. Over the period from 0 to 15 years, there was significantly more marginal bone loss (0.7 mm) in tooth-implant connected versus freestanding prostheses. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found between the non-rigid tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding prostheses. However, there was a significant difference in marginal bone loss for rigid and multi-connected tooth-implant connected prostheses versus freestanding ones. The results of this study indicate that more bone is lost around implants which are rigidly connected to teeth. This suggests that bending load, which is increased in tooth-implant connected prostheses, might be responsible for this phenomenon. These observations favor the use of freestanding prostheses whenever possible. However, the clinical significance of greater bone loss in rigid versus non-rigid connections might outweigh the annoying phenomenon of tooth intrusion in the case of non-rigid tooth connection, when connection is considered.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Naert</LastName><ForeName>I E</ForeName><Initials>IE</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry/BIOMAT Research Group, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. Ignace@MED.Kuleuven.ac.be</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Duyck</LastName><ForeName>J A</ForeName><Initials>JA</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Hosny</LastName><ForeName>M M</ForeName><Initials>MM</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Quirynen</LastName><ForeName>M</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>van Steenberghe</LastName><ForeName>D</ForeName><Initials>D</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016430">Clinical Trial</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016449">Randomized Controlled Trial</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="D000704" MajorTopicYN="N">Analysis of Variance</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D001862" MajorTopicYN="N">Bone Resorption</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000000981" MajorTopicYN="N">diagnostic imaging</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015331" MajorTopicYN="N">Cohort Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016001" MajorTopicYN="N">Confidence Intervals</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000044" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Abutments</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Implants</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017267" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D004548" MajorTopicYN="N">Elasticity</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="Q000000981" MajorTopicYN="N">diagnostic imaging</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="N">rehabilitation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="Y">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016014" MajorTopicYN="N">Linear Models</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008137" MajorTopicYN="N">Longitudinal Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018583" MajorTopicYN="N">Pliability</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011379" MajorTopicYN="N">Prognosis</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011859" MajorTopicYN="N">Radiography</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013314" MajorTopicYN="N">Stress, Mechanical</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013499" MajorTopicYN="N">Surface Properties</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013997" MajorTopicYN="N">Time Factors</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016896" MajorTopicYN="N">Treatment Outcome</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2001</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>22</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2001</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>24</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2001</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>22</Day><Hour>10</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">11359482</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">clr120309</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 003452 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 003452 | 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:11359482
|texte= Freestanding and tooth-implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients Part II: An up to 15-years radiographic evaluation.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:11359482" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |