Literature DB >> 18031439

A prospective multicenter study using two different surgical approaches in the mandible with turned Brånemark implants: conventional loading using fixed prostheses.

Jonas P Becktor1, Sten Isaksson, Camilla Billström.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The use of a submerged implant system in a nonsubmerged surgical procedure has been reported to have promising results. At the time this study was initiated, no prospective, comparative studies with randomization between submerged and nonsubmerged surgical techniques had been published.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the submerged and nonsubmerged surgical techniques when treating mandibular edentulism using a submerged implant system, with regard to implant survival and complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 77 patients were included and treated at nine clinics in Sweden and Norway. In total, 404 Brånemark System implants (standard and MkII implants) were inserted in the edentulous mandible; 198 implants according to the nonsubmerged protocol and 206 implants according to the traditional submerged procedure. The follow-up period was up to 36 months after prosthesis insertion.
RESULTS: In the nonsubmerged group, 17 implants out of 198 implants (8.6%) were lost and in the submerged group, 5 out of 206 implants (2.4%) were lost. All implant failures occurred before the delivery of the final prosthesis. No major complications were reported during the implant surgery. However, at the clinical check-up postoperatively and at the abutment connection surgery, 6 patients in the nonsubmerged group complained of pain at the implant sites, whereas there were no complaints of pain in the submerged group.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that a turned Brånemark implant designed for a submerged implant placement procedure can be used in a nonsubmerged procedure and may be as predictable as the conventional submerged approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18031439     DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2007.00041.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res        ISSN: 1523-0899            Impact factor:   3.932


  5 in total

Review 1.  WITHDRAWN: Interventions for replacing missing teeth: 1- versus 2-stage implant placement.

Authors:  Marco Esposito; Maria Gabriella Grusovin; Yun Shane Chew; Paul Coulthard; Helen V Worthington
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-23

2.  Clinical and radiographics results at 3 years of RCT with split-mouth design of submerged vs. nonsubmerged single laser-microgrooved implants in posterior areas.

Authors:  Renzo Guarnieri; Dario Di Nardo; Gianni Di Giorgio; Gabriele Miccoli; Luca Testarelli
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2019-12-18

3.  Implant Stability Changes for Nonsubmerged and Submerged Protocols for a Single Implant Mandibular Overdenture Using Ball Attachment.

Authors:  Ahmed Salah; Karim Foda; Mohamed Farouk Abdalla; Marwa Abdel Aal; Amr Naguib; Nouran Abdel Nabi
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2021-09-16

4.  Implant Stability Changes for a Single Implant Mandibular Overdenture.

Authors:  Karim Fouda; Ahmed Fahmy; Khaled Aziz; Marwa Abdel Aal; Amr Naguib; Nouran Abdel Nabi
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2021-12-08

5.  Radiological Outcomes of Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Dental Implants: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Saverio Cosola; Simone Marconcini; Michela Boccuzzi; Giovanni Battista Menchini Fabris; Ugo Covani; Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago; David Peñarrocha-Oltra
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.