Literature DB >> 12010157

Evaluation of implants placed with barrier membranes. A restrospective follow-up study up to five years.

Martin Lorenzoni1, Christof Pertl, Raoul A Polansky, Norbert Jakse, Walther A Wegscheider.   

Abstract

This follow-up study evaluated clinical and radiographic parameters of dental implants placed in combination with guided bone regeneration with barrier membranes. All implants functioned well up to 60 months after insertion. Forty-one patients, with a total of 72 augmented implants, who participated in a regular maintenance protocol, were investigated. Annual Periotest values (median value, - 3) revealed stable periimplant conditions and sustained osseointegration. At 6 months and annually thereafter up to five years, the radiographic evaluation yielded mean bone losses of 0.8, 1.25, 1.39, 1.42, 1.42 and 1.39 mm, respectively, with a range from 0 to 3.5 mm. No implant failures or losses were recorded. The results demonstrated stable periimplant conditions up to five years after membrane-protected osseous regeneration, with no significant differences in the radiographic bone level in regard to region, jaw or bone graft. Premature membrane exposure resulted in a significantly higher crestal bone loss up to 24 months. The newly formed bone appeared to be able to withstand functional loading for up to 60 months in a predictable manner.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12010157     DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130306.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  6 in total

1.  Bioactive glass induced in vitro apatite formation on composite GBR membranes.

Authors:  Teemu Tirri; Jaana Rich; Joop Wolke; Jukka Seppälä; Antti Yli-Urpo; Timo O Närhi
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2008-03-24       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  The relationship between implant stability and bone health markers in post-menopausal women with bisphosphonate exposure.

Authors:  Pamela Taxel; Denise Ortiz; David Shafer; David Pendrys; Susan Reisine; Kandasamy Rengasamy; Martin Freilich
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-03-16       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Risk Factors for Wound Dehiscence after Guided Bone Regeneration in Dental Implant Surgery.

Authors:  Young-Kyun Kim; Pil-Young Yun
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2014-05-30

4.  Biological Efficacy Comparison of Natural Tussah Silk and Mulberry Silk Nanofiber Membranes for Guided Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Yumao Chen; Ming Chen; Yang Gao; Feng Zhang; Min Jin; Shijun Lu; Minxuan Han
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-05-31

5.  Modified membrane fixation technique in a severe continuous horizontal bone defect: A case report.

Authors:  Lin-Hong Wang; Yan Ruan; Wen-Yan Zhao; Jian-Ping Chen; Fan Yang
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 1.534

6.  Assessment of dehydrothermally cross-linked collagen membrane for guided bone regeneration around peri-implant dehiscence defects: a randomized single-blinded clinical trial.

Authors:  Jae-Hong Lee; Jung-Seok Lee; Won-Sun Baek; Hyun-Chang Lim; Jae-Kook Cha; Seong-Ho Choi; Ui-Won Jung
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 2.614

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.