| 1. |
- Eliasson, Alf, 1957-, et al.
(författare)
-
A retrospective analysis of early and delayed loading of full-arch mandibular prostheses using three different implant systems: clinical results with up to 5 years of loading.
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Clinical implant dentistry and related research. - : Wiley. - 1708-8208 .- 1523-0899. ; 11:2, s. 134-48
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Early loading of implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous mandible is widely accepted, but do the clinical results replicate those of delayed loading? PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome and patient satisfaction with early or delayed loading in patients treated with fixed prostheses, using three different implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and nine consecutively treated patients received 490 implants supporting fixed prostheses; 82 patients with Brånemark System implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden), 16 with Astra Tech implants (Astra Tech AB Dental Implant system, Mölndal, Sweden), and 11 with ITI MonoType implants (ITI Dental Implant System, Institute Straumann AG, Waldenburg, Switzerland). Prostheses were placed within 2 to 3 weeks in 55 patients; 54 patients underwent a two-stage procedure. Data were collected from patient records and radiographs; 83 patients attended a clinical examination and received a questionnaire. RESULTS: All patients had fixed prostheses at follow-up with a mean observation time of 3.5 years. Cumulative survival rates (CSRs) were 92.5% of prostheses and 94.4% of implants for early loading, and 98.0 and 97.9% for delayed loading. The mean radiographic bone loss after the first year was small, and at 5 years less than 0.2 mm for both groups. With early loading, significantly more prostheses (p < .05) needed adjustment or replacement. CONCLUSION: Statistically significantly more prostheses needed adjustment or replacement in the early group. The present study suggested lower CSRs for prostheses and implants in the early loading group after 5 years; the difference was not statistically significant. Larger study samples are needed to verify statistically small differences between treatment techniques.
|
|
| 2. |
- Eliasson, Alf, 1957-, et al.
(författare)
-
Fixed partial prostheses supported by 2 or 3 implants: a retrospective study up to 18 years
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. - : Quintessence Publishing. ; 21:4, s. 567-574
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the long-term performance of fixed partial prostheses supported by 2 or 3 implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients treated with fixed partial prostheses supported by either 2 or 3 implants during the period 1985 to 1998 were included in this retrospective report. Annual clinical follow-up examinations were performed, with special attention to stability of the prostheses and peri-implant and occlusal conditions. Radiographic examination was performed when the prostheses were delivered (year 0) and subsequently at 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year examinations. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients had received fixed partial prostheses (FPPs) during this period of whom 123 (77 women and 46 men) were available for follow-up (mean age = 65 years, range 32-91). These 123 patients received a total of 146 implant-supported FPPs (63 two-implant- and 83 three-implant-supported) supported by 375 implants. The mean observation periods for the 2- and 3-implant-supported restorations were 9.6 years and 9.4 years (range, 5 to 18 years), respectively. Survival rates for the 2- and 3-implant-supported prostheses were 96.8% and 97.6%, respectively. The implant survival rate after loading was 98.4% for both groups. The mean bone loss at the 5-year follow-up was 0.3 mm for the 2 groups. No significant differences in bone loss (P > .05), implant failure rate (P > .05), or incidence of mechanical complications (P > .05) were found between the 2 prosthesis designs. The complications differed, significantly, with more loose gold and abutment screws in the 2-implant-supported group (P < .05) and more porcelain fractures in the 3-implant-supported group (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The 2-implant-supported partial prostheses exhibited long-term clinical performance comparable to prostheses supported by 3 implants.
|
|
| 3. |
- Eliasson, Alf, 1957-, et al.
(författare)
-
The precision of fit of milled titanium implant frameworks (I-Bridge) in the edentulous jaw.
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Clinical implant dentistry and related research. - : Wiley. - 1708-8208 .- 1523-0899. ; 12:2, s. 81-90
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: New computer numeric controlled (CNC)-milled frameworks for implant-supported prostheses have been introduced. However, no data are available on the precision of fit of these new frameworks. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the precision of fit of a new CNC-milled framework technique (I-Bridge, Biomain AB, Helsingborg, Sweden) using Brånemark System (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) and NobelReplace (Nobel Biocare AB) system implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten test frameworks were fabricated for one master model for each implant system. Five additional frameworks were fabricated for five different models simulating clinical cases as controls (Brånemark System). The distortion of implant center point positions was measured in x-, y-, and z-axes and in three dimensions by using a contact-type coordinate measuring machine and a computer program developed specifically for this purpose. Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare differences of distortion within and between the groups. RESULTS: The maximal distortion in arch width (x-axis) and curvature (y-axis) was within 71 and 55 microm for all frameworks, respectively. The mean distortion in absolute figures in x-, y-, z-axes and three dimensions was for "clinical control" frameworks 23, 26, 4, and 34 microm as compared with less than 12, 12, 2, and 17 microm for Brånemark and NobelReplace frameworks, respectively. Control frameworks showed significantly (p < .05) greater mean and range of distortions in x- and y-axes and in three dimensions compared with test frameworks. CONCLUSION: All measured frameworks presented signs of misfit, indicating that no framework had a "passive fit." Frameworks produced in a more routine clinical environment seem to present greater levels of distortion as compared with frameworks produced in a strict test situation. However, all measured frameworks presented levels of precision of fit within limits considered to be clinically acceptable in earlier studies of frameworks placed on abutments.
|
|
