a retrospective study on a series of 556 zimmer dental implants

Klik: 374
ID: 158065
2012
PDF Gratis
Metrik Kualitas & Kinerja Artikel
Kualitas Keseluruhan
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Penilaian Kualitas AI
Belum dianalisis
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #9 of 59 articles by views in Mycoses

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstrak
Background: One-stage surgery with immediate loading is possible, with good clinical results. Many types of dental implants are available in the market. Zimmer Dental Implants (ZDIs) have been used since the nineties, but few reports have analyzed the clinical outcome of these fixtures. We planned a retrospective study on a series 566 ZDIs, to evaluate their clinical outcome. Materials and Methods: In the period between January 2007 and June 2011, 125 patients were treatetd with ZDIs. The last check-up was performed in June 2012, with a mean follow-up period of 17 ± 9 months (minimum – maximum, 8-4 months). ZDIs were inserted as follows: 295 (53.1%) in the maxilla and 261 (46.9%) in the mandible. There were 480 (86.3%) Screw-vents, 51 (9.2%) Swiss Plusses, and 25 (4.5%) Splines. Sixteen, 355, 34, 90, 55, and six fixtures had a diameter of 3.25, 3.7, 3.75, 4.1, 4.7, and 4.8 mm, respectively. Twenty-eight, 145, 5, 217, 8, 141, and 12 implants hade a length of 8, 10, 11, 11.5, 12, 13, and 14 mm, respectively. The implants were inserted to replace 136 (24.5%) incisors, 80 (14.4%) cuspids, 198 (35.6%) premolars, and 142 (25.5%) molars. Results: No implants were lost (i.e., SRV = 100%). Among the studied variables, only those for the jaws were statistically significant, with a better outcome for implants inserted in the maxilla ( P = 0.017). Conclusions: ZDIs are reliable devices to be used in implantology, althougth a higher marginal bone loss has to be expected when these implants are inserted in mandible.
Kunci Referensi
soardi2012dentala Gunakan kunci ini untuk mengutip otomatis dalam naskah saat menggunakan SciMatic Manuscript Manager atau Thesis Manager
Penulis ;Carlo Maria Soardi;Ezio Zandanel;Elena Rebuffini;Rebuffini2 Carinci
Jurnal Mycoses
Tahun 2012
DOI
10.4103/1735-3327.109748
URL
http://www.drjjournal.net/article.asp?issn=1735-3327;year=2012;volume=9;issue=8;spage=181;epage=185;aulast=Soardi
Kata Kunci
denture prosthesis implant fixture

Sitasi

Tidak ada sitasi yang ditemukan. Untuk menambahkan sitasi, hubungi admin di info@scimatic.org

Komentar

Belum ada komentar. Jadilah yang pertama berkomentar pada artikel ini.