A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.
Identifieur interne : 003B09 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 003B08; suivant : 003B10A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.
Auteurs : A K R Ynesdal ; E. Ambj Rnsen ; S. St Vne ; H R HaanaesSource :
- The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants [ 0882-2786 ]
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Analysis of Variance, Bone Resorption (etiology), Dental Abutments, Dental Implantation, Endosseous (adverse effects), Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Denture, Overlay, Durapatite, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation), Jaw, Edentulous (surgery), Male, Mandible (surgery), Mandibular Diseases (etiology), Osseointegration, Prognosis, Surface Properties, Titanium, Treatment Outcome.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants, Durapatite, Titanium.
- adverse effects : Dental Implantation, Endosseous.
- etiology : Bone Resorption, Mandibular Diseases.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous.
- surgery : Jaw, Edentulous, Mandible.
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Analysis of Variance, Dental Abutments, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Denture, Overlay, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Osseointegration, Prognosis, Surface Properties, Treatment Outcome.
Abstract
The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the clinical outcome and marginal bone resorption of three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandibles of 15 elderly patients. Eleven women and 4 men (ranging from 65 to 80 years, mean 71 years) had three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandible; one titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implant (4-mm diameter), one titanium cylinder implant with hydroxyapatite coating (4-mm diameter), and one standard threaded titanium implant (3.75-mm diameter). Three months later, at the second-stage surgical procedure, ball abutments were connected and an overdenture was placed. At 12, 24, and 36 months, marginal bone resorption and Periotest values were recorded. None of the implants was lost in this period. An analysis of variance with repeated measurement was performed annually to test the existence of significant differences between the implants. When differences appeared, paired t tests were used to identify which differences were significant. Bonferroni multipliers were used to adjust for multiple testing. When marginal bone resorption was concerned, threaded titanium and hydroxyapatite-coated implants had significantly better scores than titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants. Periotest values for hydroxyapatite-coated implants were significantly better than test values for the other implants after 2 years. After 3 years significance was obtained between hydroxyapatite and screw-shaped implants only (P < .05). It was concluded that titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants have a less favorable prognosis than the other implants used in this study.
PubMed: 9714956
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:9714956Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.</title><author><name sortKey="R Ynesdal, A K" sort="R Ynesdal, A K" uniqKey="R Ynesdal A" first="A K" last="R Ynesdal">A K R Ynesdal</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Oral Surgery and Oral Medicine, Dental Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ambj Rnsen, E" sort="Ambj Rnsen, E" uniqKey="Ambj Rnsen E" first="E" last="Ambj Rnsen">E. Ambj Rnsen</name></author><author><name sortKey="St Vne, S" sort="St Vne, S" uniqKey="St Vne S" first="S" last="St Vne">S. St Vne</name></author><author><name sortKey="Haanaes, H R" sort="Haanaes, H R" uniqKey="Haanaes H" first="H R" last="Haanaes">H R Haanaes</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="????"><PubDate><MedlineDate>1998 Jul-Aug</MedlineDate></PubDate></date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:9714956</idno><idno type="pmid">9714956</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">003B09</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">003B09</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.</title><author><name sortKey="R Ynesdal, A K" sort="R Ynesdal, A K" uniqKey="R Ynesdal A" first="A K" last="R Ynesdal">A K R Ynesdal</name><affiliation><nlm:affiliation>Department of Oral Surgery and Oral Medicine, Dental Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway.</nlm:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ambj Rnsen, E" sort="Ambj Rnsen, E" uniqKey="Ambj Rnsen E" first="E" last="Ambj Rnsen">E. Ambj Rnsen</name></author><author><name sortKey="St Vne, S" sort="St Vne, S" uniqKey="St Vne S" first="S" last="St Vne">S. St Vne</name></author><author><name sortKey="Haanaes, H R" sort="Haanaes, H R" uniqKey="Haanaes H" first="H R" last="Haanaes">H R Haanaes</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants</title><idno type="ISSN">0882-2786</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Analysis of Variance</term><term>Bone Resorption (etiology)</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous (adverse effects)</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Durapatite</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (surgery)</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible (surgery)</term><term>Mandibular Diseases (etiology)</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Surface Properties</term><term>Titanium</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Durapatite</term><term>Titanium</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="adverse effects" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="etiology" xml:lang="en"><term>Bone Resorption</term><term>Mandibular Diseases</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><term>Mandible</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Aged, 80 and over</term><term>Analysis of Variance</term><term>Dental Abutments</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Female</term><term>Follow-Up Studies</term><term>Humans</term><term>Male</term><term>Osseointegration</term><term>Prognosis</term><term>Surface Properties</term><term>Treatment Outcome</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the clinical outcome and marginal bone resorption of three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandibles of 15 elderly patients. Eleven women and 4 men (ranging from 65 to 80 years, mean 71 years) had three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandible; one titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implant (4-mm diameter), one titanium cylinder implant with hydroxyapatite coating (4-mm diameter), and one standard threaded titanium implant (3.75-mm diameter). Three months later, at the second-stage surgical procedure, ball abutments were connected and an overdenture was placed. At 12, 24, and 36 months, marginal bone resorption and Periotest values were recorded. None of the implants was lost in this period. An analysis of variance with repeated measurement was performed annually to test the existence of significant differences between the implants. When differences appeared, paired t tests were used to identify which differences were significant. Bonferroni multipliers were used to adjust for multiple testing. When marginal bone resorption was concerned, threaded titanium and hydroxyapatite-coated implants had significantly better scores than titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants. Periotest values for hydroxyapatite-coated implants were significantly better than test values for the other implants after 2 years. After 3 years significance was obtained between hydroxyapatite and screw-shaped implants only (P < .05). It was concluded that titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants have a less favorable prognosis than the other implants used in this study.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">9714956</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>1998</Year><Month>09</Month><Day>08</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2013</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>21</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Print">0882-2786</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Print"><Volume>13</Volume><Issue>4</Issue><PubDate><MedlineDate>1998 Jul-Aug</MedlineDate></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>500-5</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText>The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the clinical outcome and marginal bone resorption of three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandibles of 15 elderly patients. Eleven women and 4 men (ranging from 65 to 80 years, mean 71 years) had three different endosseous implants placed in the anterior mandible; one titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implant (4-mm diameter), one titanium cylinder implant with hydroxyapatite coating (4-mm diameter), and one standard threaded titanium implant (3.75-mm diameter). Three months later, at the second-stage surgical procedure, ball abutments were connected and an overdenture was placed. At 12, 24, and 36 months, marginal bone resorption and Periotest values were recorded. None of the implants was lost in this period. An analysis of variance with repeated measurement was performed annually to test the existence of significant differences between the implants. When differences appeared, paired t tests were used to identify which differences were significant. Bonferroni multipliers were used to adjust for multiple testing. When marginal bone resorption was concerned, threaded titanium and hydroxyapatite-coated implants had significantly better scores than titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants. Periotest values for hydroxyapatite-coated implants were significantly better than test values for the other implants after 2 years. After 3 years significance was obtained between hydroxyapatite and screw-shaped implants only (P < .05). It was concluded that titanium plasma-sprayed cylinder implants have a less favorable prognosis than the other implants used in this study.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Røynesdal</LastName><ForeName>A K</ForeName><Initials>AK</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Oral Surgery and Oral Medicine, Dental Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Ambjørnsen</LastName><ForeName>E</ForeName><Initials>E</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Støvne</LastName><ForeName>S</ForeName><Initials>S</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Haanaes</LastName><ForeName>H R</ForeName><Initials>HR</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>United States</Country><MedlineTA>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>8611905</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0882-2786</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance></Chemical><Chemical><RegistryNumber>91D9GV0Z28</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D017886">Durapatite</NameOfSubstance></Chemical><Chemical><RegistryNumber>D1JT611TNE</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D014025">Titanium</NameOfSubstance></Chemical></ChemicalList><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><CitationSubset>IM</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="D000704" MajorTopicYN="N">Analysis of Variance</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D001862" MajorTopicYN="N">Bone Resorption</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000209" MajorTopicYN="N">etiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000044" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Abutments</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003758" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Implantation, Endosseous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000009" MajorTopicYN="N">adverse effects</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implants</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017267" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003828" MajorTopicYN="N">Denture, Overlay</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017886" MajorTopicYN="N">Durapatite</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="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="N">rehabilitation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="Y">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008334" MajorTopicYN="N">Mandible</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000601" MajorTopicYN="Y">surgery</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008336" MajorTopicYN="N">Mandibular Diseases</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000209" MajorTopicYN="N">etiology</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016348" MajorTopicYN="N">Osseointegration</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011379" MajorTopicYN="N">Prognosis</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D013499" MajorTopicYN="N">Surface Properties</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D014025" MajorTopicYN="N">Titanium</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D016896" MajorTopicYN="N">Treatment Outcome</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>1998</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>26</Day></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>1998</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>26</Day><Hour>0</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>1998</Year><Month>8</Month><Day>26</Day><Hour>0</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">9714956</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 003B09 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 003B09 | 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:9714956
|texte= A comparative clinical study of three different endosseous implants in edentulous mandibles.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:9714956" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |