↓ Direkt till sidans innehåll
↓ Direkt till sidans sekundära innehåll (sidomenyn)

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Esposito Marco 1965) "

Search: WFRF:(Esposito Marco 1965)

Result 1-50 of 207

Sort/group result

Sort by: Hits per page:

Enumeration	Reference	Cover	Find
1.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of three (fixed-on-3) vs four (fixed-on-4) implants supporting cross-arch fixed prostheses: 1-year results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2018 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:3, s. 323-333 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the outcome of three (fixed-on-3 = Fo3) vs four (fixed-on-4 = Fo4) implants immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses in fully edentulous jaws.Forty-eight edentulous or to be rendered edentulous patients were randomised in six centres (eight patients per centre) to the Fo3 group (24 patients: 12 maxillae and 12 mandibles) and to the Fo4 group (24 patients: 12 maxillae and 12 mandibles) according to a parallel group design. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 40 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications and peri-implant marginal bone level changes evaluated up to 1 year post-loading.One maxillary prosthesis per group was delayed loaded because implants could not be placed with a torque of at least 40 Ncm. Ten patients in the Fo3 group and four in the Fo4 group had implants placed flapless. One year after loading no drop out occurred. One patient of the Fo3 group lost three implants vs three patients of the Fo4 group who lost four implants, the difference being no statistically significant (risk difference = -0.08; 95% CI: -0.27 to 0.10; Fisher's exact test P = 0.609). One mandibular Fo3 and one maxillary Fo4 prosthesis failed. Six Fo3 patients were affected by complications vs three Fo4 patients (risk difference = 0.12; 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.34; Fisher's exact test; P = 0.461). Both groups lost marginal bone in a statistically significant way (0.22 ± 0.20 mm for Fo3 patients and 0.40 ± 0.21 mm for Fo4 patients), with Fo3 group showing less marginal peri-implant bone loss than Fo4 group (estimate of the difference = -0.18 (standard error: 0.06) mm; 95% CI: -0.30 to -0.06; P = 0.005). There were no differences in clinical outcomes between the six operators.These preliminary results suggest that immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses of both jaws can be supported by only three dental implants at least up to 1 year post-loading, though longer follow-ups are definitively needed.
2.	Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al. (author) Endodontic retreatment versus dental implants of teeth with an uncertain endodontic prognosis: 3-year results from a randomised controlled trial. 2018 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:4, s. 423-438 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To ascertain whether in the presence of a previously endodontically treated tooth with periapical pathology and/or symptoms and an uncertain prognosis, it is better to endodontically retreat it or to replace the tooth with a single-implant-supported crown.Twenty patients requiring the treatment of a previously endodontically treated tooth, with periapical pathology and/or symptoms of endodontic origin and an uncertain prognosis, as judged by the recruiting investigator, were randomly allocated to endodontic retreatment (Endo group, 10 patients) or tooth extraction and replacement with an implant-supported crown (Implant group, 10 patients) according to a parallel-group design at a single centre. Patients were followed to 3 years after completion of the treatment. Outcome measures were: failure of the procedure, complications, marginal bone level changes at both teeth and implants, endodontic radiographic success (teeth only), number of patients' visits and days to complete the treatment, patients' chair time, costs, aesthetics assessed using the pink aesthetic score (PES) for the soft tissues and the white aesthetic score (WES) for the tooth/crown recorded by independent assessors.No patient dropped out. One endodontically retreated tooth fractured and another had a crown loosening. There were no statistically significant differences for treatment failure or complications (difference in proportions = 0.10; 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.29; P (Fisher exact test) = 1.000). The mean marginal bone levels at endodontic retreatment/implant insertion were 2.10 ± 0.66 mm for the Endo group and 0.05 ± 0.15 mm for the Implant group. Three years after completion of the treatment, teeth lost on average 0.23 ± 0.82 mm and implants 0.62 ± 0.68 mm, the difference not being statistically significant (mean difference = -0.39 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.12 to 0.33; P (t test) = 0.267). Three years after completion of the endodontic retreatment, of the four teeth that originally had a periapical radiolucency, one was lost, two showed complete healing, and one showed radiographic improvement. There were no statistically significant differences for the number of patients' visits (Endo = 6.67 ± 0.71; Implant = 6.10 ± 0.74; mean difference = 0.57; 95% CI: -0.14 to 1.27; P (t test) = 0.106). It took significantly more days to complete the implant rehabilitation (Endo = 61 ± 12.97; Implant = 191.40 ± 75.04; mean difference = -130.40; 95% CI: -184.45 to -76.35; P (t test) < 0.001) but less patients' chair time (Endo = 629.44 ± 43.62 min; Implant = 326 ± 196.99 min; mean difference = 303.44; 95% CI: 160.87 to 446.02; P (t test) = 0.001). Implant treatment was significantly more expensive (Endo = €1,588.89 ± 300.81; Implant = €2,095 ± 158.90; mean difference = €-506.11; 95% CI: -735.41 to -276.82; P (t test) < 0.001). Three years after treatment completion, mean PES were 11.11 ± 1.97 and 6.50 ± 2.46 and mean WES were 7.78 ± 1.30 and 6.80 ± 2.39 in the Endo group and Implant group, respectively. Soft tissues aesthetics (PES) were significantly better at endodontically retreated teeth (mean difference 4.61; 95% CI: 2.44 to 6.78; P (t test) < 0.001) whereas no significant differences were observed for tooth aesthetics (WES) (mean difference 0.98; 95% CI: -0.89 to 2.85; P (t test) = 0.281) between treatments.The present preliminary results suggest that both endodontic retreatment and replacement of previously endodontically treated teeth with persisting pathology and a dubious endodontic prognosis provided similar short-term success rates. Aesthetics of the soft tissues and time needed to complete treatment were in favour of endodontic retreatment whereas implant rehabilitation required half of the chair time than endodontic retreatment, but was significantly more expensive. Much larger patient populations and longer follow-ups are needed to fully answer this question; however, in this scenario the less invasive endodontic retreatment could be the first therapeutic option to be considered.
3.	Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al. (author) Endodontic retreatment vs dental implants of teeth with an uncertain endodontic prognosis: 1-year results from a randomised controlled trial. 2017 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:3, s. 293-308 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To ascertain whether in the presence of a previously endodontically treated tooth with a periapical pathology and/or symptoms and an uncertain prognosis, it is better to endodontically retreat it or to replace the tooth with a single implant-supported crown.Forty patients requiring the treatment of a previously endodontically treated tooth, with a periapical pathology and/or symptoms of endodontic origin and an uncertain prognosis, as judged by the recruiting investigators, were randomly allocated to endodontic retreatment (endo group; 20 patients) or tooth extraction and replacement with an implant-supported crown (implant group; 20 patients) according to a parallel group design at two different centres. Patients were followed to 1 year after completion of the treatment. Outcome measures were: failure of the procedure, complications, marginal bone level changes at both teeth and implants, endodontic radiographic success (teeth only), number of patients' visits and days to complete the treatment, patients' chair time, costs, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES) for the soft tissues and the white esthetic score (WES) for the tooth/crown recorded by independent assessors.No patient dropped out and no complications occurred during the entire follow-up; however, one endodontically retreated tooth (5%) and one implant (5%) fractured, the difference for treatment failures being not statistically significant (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI -0.14 to 0.14; P Fisher's exact test) = 1.000). The mean marginal bone levels at endo retreatment/implant insertion were 2.34 ± 0.88 mm for the endo and 0.23 ± 0.35 mm for the implant group, which was statistically significantly different (mean difference = 2.11 mm; 95% CI: 1.68 to 2.55; P (t-test) < 0.001). One year after completion of the treatment, teeth lost on average 0.32 ± 0.53 mm and implants 0.48 ± 0.72, the difference not being statistically significant (mean difference = -0.16 mm; 95% CI: -0.58 to 0.27; P (t-test) = 0.457). One year after completion of the endodontic retreatment, of the 13 teeth that originally had a periapical radiolucency, one was lost, six showed complete healing; four a radiographic improvement; and two showed no changes/worsening. Two of the teeth originally without a lesion developed a lesion. There were no statistically significant differences for the number of patients' visits (endo = 5.2 ± 1.8; implant = 5.5 ± 1.1; mean difference = -0.03 95% CI: -1.24 to 0.64; P (t-test) = 0.522). It took significantly more days to complete the implant rehabilitation (endo = 48.9 ± 19.5; implant = 158.5 ± 67.2; mean difference = -109.60; 95% CI: -141.26 to -77.94; P (t-test) < 0.001), but less patients' chair time (endo = 405.5 ± 230.3 min; implant = 260.0 ± 154.6 min; mean difference = 45.50; 95% CI: 19.35 to 271.65; P (t-test) = 0.025). Implant treatment was significantly more expensive (endo = 1195 ± 503.7 €; implant = 1907.5 ± 232.4 €; mean difference = -712.50; 95% CI: -963.59 to -461.41; P (t-test) < 0.001). One year after treatment completion, the mean PES was 10.92 ± 1.93 and 7.07 ± 2.87 and the mean WES was 7.67 ± 1.83 and 7.60 ± 2.32 in the endo group and implant group, respectively. Soft tissues aesthetics (PES) was significantly better at endodontically retreated teeth (mean difference 3.85; 95% CI 1.94 to 5.76; P (t-test) < 0.001) whereas no significant differences were observed for tooth aesthetics (WES) (mean difference 0.07; 95% CI -1.62 to 1.76; P (t-test) = 0.936) between treatments.The preliminary results suggest that both endodontic retreatment and replacement of previously endodontically treated teeth with persisting pathology and a dubious endodontic prognosis provided similar short-term success rates. Aesthetics of the soft tissues and time needed to complete treatment were in favour of endodontic retreatment, whereas implant rehabilitation required half of the chair time than endodontic retreatment, but was significantly more expensive. Although much larger patient populations and longer follow-ups are needed to fully answer this question, in this scenario the less invasive endodontic retreatment could be the first therapeutic option to be considered.
4.	Pozzi, Alessandro, et al. (author) Computer-guided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2014 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 7:3, s. 229-42 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To compare planning and patient rehabilitation using a 3D dental planning software and dedicated surgical guides with conventional rehabilitation of partially or fully edentulous patients using flapless or mini-flap procedures and immediate loading.
5.	Xhanari, Erta, et al. (author) MACHINED VERSUS CAST ABUTMENTS FOR SINGLE DENTAL IMPLANTS: A 3-YEAR WITHIN-PATIENT MULTICENTRE RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL 2023 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. - 2784-9015 .- 2785-3039. ; 5:1, s. 5-16 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE. To compare clinical outcomes of machined titanium abutments (machined group) versus cast cobalt-chrome abutments (cast group). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-one partially edentulous subjects received two single non-adjacent implant-supported crowns each at three centres. Three and a half months after implant placement, implants were randomized at impression taking to receive one machined and one cast abutment according to a within-patient study design. Four patients dropped out and one patient lost one implant before randomization, so only 26 patients had their implants randomized. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, and radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level changes. Patients were followed up for 3 years after loading. RESULTS. After randomization, three patients dropped out. One implant failed and two crowns on cast abutments were lost, but differences in implant and prosthesis failures were not statistically different (McNemar test P = 1.000; difference in proportions = 0.04 and P = 0.500; difference in proportions = 0.08, respectively). Two minor complications occurred in the cast group versus one in the machined group, the difference not being statistically different (McNemar test P = 1.000; difference in proportions = 0.04; 95% CI 0.18 to 22.06). Both groups presented statistically significant peri-implant marginal bone loss from implant placement to 3 years after loading, respectively-0.72 ± 0.90 mm (P = 0.001) for machined and-0.60 ± 0.61 mm (P <0.001) for cast abutments, with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (mean difference-0.12 mm; 95% CI-0.57 to 0.34; P = 0.624). Both groups gradually lost marginal peri-implant bone from loading (baseline) to 3 years after loading, but this was not statistically significant; machined lost-0.05 ± 0.12 mm while cast lost-0.14 ± 0.11 mm, a difference that was not statistically significant (mean difference 0.06 mm; 95% CI-0.24 to 0.35; P = 0.708). CONCLUSIONS. The present clinical data suggest that implant prognosis up to 3 years after loading is not affected by the choice of machined or cast abutments.
6.	Albrektsson, Tomas, 1945, et al. (author) Implant survival and complications. The Third EAO consensus conference 2012. 2012 In: Clinical oral implants research. - : Wiley. - 1600-0501 .- 0905-7161. ; 23 Suppl 6, s. 63-5 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract The task of this working group was to analyze biological, technical and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants and fixed dental prostheses with or without cantilevers on implants over 5 years or more. In addition, the group analyzed economic aspects on such implant treatment.
7.	Alissa, Rami, et al. (author) Einfluss von Ibuprofen auf die Knochenheilung an Dentalimplantaten Eine randomisierte klinische Doppelblindstudie mit Plazebokontrolle : Effect of Ibuprofen of the bone cure in case of dental implants A random clinical double blind, placebo-controlled study 2010 In: IMPLANTOLOGIE. - 0943-9692. ; 18:1, s. 61-76 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Diese randomisierte plazebokontrollierte Doppelblindstudie wurde durchgeführt, um den Einfluss postoperativer Gaben von 600 mg Ibuprofen (eine Woche lang viermal täglich) auf das marginale Knochenniveau rund um Dentalimplantate zu untersuchen. Insgesamt wurden 61 Patienten entweder der Ibuprofen-Gruppe (n = 31) oder der Plazebo-Gruppe (n = 30) zugeordnet. Von 132 eingesetzten Implantaten entfielen 67 auf die Ibuprofen-Gruppe und 65 auf die Plazebo-Gruppe. Die Präparation der Implantatstollen erfolgte per intermittierender Bohrabfolge, angepasst an die Implantatdurchmesser und die lokale Knochenqualität entsprechend den Implantationsrichtlinien von Astra Tech. Untersucht wurden in erster Linie die Veränderungen des marginalen Knochenniveaus an den Dentalimplantaten vom Ausgangspunkt zwei Wochen nach der Implantation bis zu den Röntgenuntersuchungen nach drei und sechs Monaten. Die Zahnfilme wurden in Paralleltechnik unter Verwendung eines Filmhalters mit Strahlenleitvorrichtung aufgenommen. Mit Sichtbox und Handlupe (Vergrößerungsfaktor 8) wurde gemessen, wie stark sich das Knochenniveau veränderte. Zwei Patienten aus der Ibuprofen-Gruppe konnten die verordnete Anwendung des Medikaments wegen einer geringfügigen subjektiven Magenverstimmung nicht zu Ende führen. In der Kontrollgruppe erschien ein Patient zu keinem einzigen der vereinbarten Termine nach den Implantationen. Somit gab es insgesamt drei Studienabbrecher. Während der sechsmonatigen Beobachtungsdauer blieben alle Implantate in beiden Gruppen intakt. In der Ibuprofen-Gruppe reduzierten sich die Ausgangswerte beim Knochenniveau nach drei Monaten um durchschnittlich 0,33 mm und nach sechs Monaten um 0,29 mm. In der Plazebo-Gruppe waren diese Werte um 0,12 mm beziehungsweise 0,30 mm reduziert. Signifikante Gruppenunterschiede beim mittleren marginalen Knochenniveau zeigten sich weder nach drei (p = 0,27) noch nach sechs Monaten (p = 0,97). Es wurde geschlussfolgert, dass kurzfristige systemische Schmerzbehandlungen mit Ibuprofen in der frühen Einheilphase von Implantaten offenbar keinen signifikanten Einfluss auf den marginalen Knochen an Dentalimplantaten haben.
8.	Alissa, Rami, et al. (author) The influence of platelet-rich plasma on the healing of extraction sockets: an explorative randomised clinical trial 2010 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 121-134 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on the healing of hard and soft tissues of extraction sockets with a pilot study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing tooth extraction under intravenous sedation were asked to participate in the trial. Autologous platelet concentrates were prepared from the patients' blood and autologous thrombin was produced. Outcome measures were: pain level, analgesic consumption, oral function (ability to eat food, swallowing, mouth opening and speech), general activity, swelling, bruising, bleeding, bad taste or halitosis, food stagnation, patient satisfaction, healing complications, soft tissue healing, trabecular pattern of newly formed bone in extraction sockets, trabecular bone volume, trabecular separation, trabecular length, trabecular width, and trabecular number. Patients were followed up to 3 months post-extraction. RESULTS: Twelve patients (15 sockets) were randomly allocated to the PRP group and 11 patients (14 sockets) to the control group. Two patients from the control group did not attend any of the scheduled appointments following tooth extraction, and were considered dropouts. Additionally, one more patient from the control group and four patients from the PRP group did not attend their 3-month radiographic assessment appointments. Statistically significantly more pain was recorded in the control group for the first (P=0.02), second (P=0.02) and third (P=0.04) post-operative days for Visual Analogue Scale scores, whereas no differences were observed for the fourth (P=0.17), fifth (P=0.38), sixth (P=0.75) and seventh (P=0.75) post-operative days. There was a statistically significantly higher analgesic consumption for the first (P=0.03) and second (P=0.02) post-operative days in the control group and no differences thereafter. Differences in patients' responses in the health-related quality of life questionnaire were statistically significant in favour of PRP treatment only for the presence of bad taste or bad smell in the mouth (P=0.03), and food stagnation in the operation area (P=0.03). The difference between groups was not statistically significant for patient satisfaction with the treatment (P=0.31). Regarding complications, two dry sockets and one acutely inflamed alveolus occurred in patients of the control group, which determined a borderline statistically significant difference in favour of the PRP group (P=0.06). Soft tissue healing was significantly better in patients treated with PRP (P=0.03). Radiographic evaluation carried out by the two blinded examiners revealed a statistically significant difference (P=0.01) for sockets with dense homogeneous trabecular pattern, a borderline statistically significant difference in the trabecular pattern for bone volume (P=0.06) favouring PRP use, and no significant differences for trabecular separation (P=0.66), trabecular length (P=0.16), trabecular width (P=0.16) and trabecular number (P=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: PRP may have some benefits in reducing complications such as alveolar osteitis and improving healing of soft tissue of extraction sockets. There were insufficient data to support the use of PRP to promote bone healing or to enhance the quality of life of patients following tooth extraction, although the sample size was too small to detect statistically significant differences.
9.	Alqutaibi, A. Y., et al. (author) Single vs two implant-retained overdentures for edentulous mandibles: A systematic review 2017 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:3, s. 243-261 Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To compare prosthesis and implant failure, patient satisfaction, prosthetic complications and peri-implant marginal bone loss of mandibular overdentures (IOD) supported by a single or two implants. Materials and methods: Manual and electronic database (PubMed and Cochrane) searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials, without language restriction, comparing single vs two implant supported mandibular overdentures. Two investigators extracted data independently. The Cochrane tool was used for assessing the quality of included studies. Meta-analyses were performed for the included RCTs. Results: Six publications corresponding to four RCTs were identified. Three RCTs (corresponding to five publications) were included and one trial was excluded. Follow-ups in function were 1, 3 and 5 years after loading. All included studies were considered to be at a high risk of bias. The pooled result revealed more prosthesis failures at overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02), however, there were non-significant differences at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.22; Risk Difference: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.83, 0.19) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.24). Regarding implant failures, there were more implant losses in overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: -0.15, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.02), however, there were non-significant difference at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.2; Risk Difference: -0.33, 95% CI: -0.84, 0.18). After 5 years in function, meta-analyses revealed that there were nonsignificant differences regarding overall prosthetic complications when mandibular overdentures supported by a single implant were compared with overdentures supported by two implants (P = 0.43; RD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.06, 0.15). Conclusion: Mandibular overdentures retained by a single implant have comparable results to those retained by two implants. However, this should be interpreted with caution as all the included studies were considered at a high risk of bias. Conflict of interest statement: None declared. © Quintessenz.
10.	Arduino, P. G., et al. (author) Single preoperative dose of prophylactic amoxicillin versus a 2-day postoperative course in dental implant surgery: A two-centre randomised controlled trial 2015 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 8:2, s. 143-149 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the difference between a single preoperative dose versus an additional two-day postoperative course of oral amoxicillin in patients undergoing conventional dental implant placement. Materials and methods: Two dentists in two different private practices conducted this study. One hour prior to surgery, patients had to take a single prophylactic antibiotic dose, consisting of 2 g of amoxicillin orally; after implant placement, patients were randomly allocated to two different groups: protocol A (no other antibiotic administration) and protocol B, (1 g of amoxicillin in the evening of the day of surgery and 1 g twice a day for the 2 days after). Outcome measures were prosthetic and implant failures, adverse events and early postoperative complications. Patients were followed up to 6 months after functional loading. Results: Three hundred and sixty patients were randomised and treated (192 patients in one centre and 168 in the other). Five hundred and sixty-seven implants were placed. Protocol A was applied to 180 patients (278 implants) and protocol B also to 180 patients (289 implants). Data for 17 patients, 14 from protocol A and three from protocol B, were not available. No statistically significant differences were found for the reported outcomes. Two patients of protocol B experienced a prosthetic failure, losing four implants, while no prosthetic failures were reported for protocol A (P = 0.4836; difference in proportions = -0.0110; 95% Cl: -0.0412 to 0.0119). Five patients (3.0%) of protocol A lost five implants versus 5 patients (2.8%) who lost eight implants in protocol B (P = 1.0000; difference in proportions = 0.0020; 95% Cl: -0.0384 to 0.0438). Three adverse events were observed in the total population, all occurring in protocol B (1.69%), with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.1199; difference in proportions =-0.0170; 95% Cl: -0.0487 to 0.0059). However, one patient experienced a severe allergic reaction requiring therapy discontinuation and hospital admission. Early postoperative complications occurred in six patients of protocol A and in four patients of protocol B, with no statistically significant differences (P = 0.5170; difference in proportions = 0.0130; 95% Cl: -0.0254 to 0.0568). Conclusions: No statistically significant differences were observed between 2 g of preoperative amoxicillin and an additional 2-day postoperative course, although adverse events were reported only in the additional 2-day postoperative group. Based on these findings, it might be sufficient to routinely administer preoperatively 2 g of amoxicillin to patients undergoing routine dental implant placement procedures rather than administering additional postoperative doses.
11.	Atieh, M. A., et al. (author) ALVEOLAR RIDGE PRESERVATION: A COCHRANE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS 2021 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. - 2784-9015. ; 3:3, s. 5-36 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE. To evaluate the effects of various materials and techniques for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) after tooth extraction compared with extraction alone or other methods of ARP in patients requiring dental implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of ARP techniques with at least six months of follow-up. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias tool. Data were analysed using a statistical software program. RESULTS. A total of 16 RCTs with 524 extraction sockets in 426 participants were included. The meta-analysis showed a very low certainty evidence of a reduction in loss of alveolar ridge width (mean difference (MD)-1.18 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI)-1.82 to-0.54; P = 0.0003) and height (MD-1.35 mm, 95% CI-2.00 to-0.70; P < 0.0001) in favour of xenograft when compared to extraction alone. There are no significant differences in the need for additional augmentation or implant failure between xenograft and extraction alone. No serious adverse events were reported with most trials indicating that the procedure was uneventful. CONCLUSIONS. ARP techniques may minimise the overall changes in residual ridge height and width six months after extraction but the evidence is very uncertain. There is no evidence of any clinically significant difference between different grafting materials and barriers used for ARP.
12.	Atieh, Momen A, et al. (author) Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development. 2015 In: The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. - 1469-493X. ; :5 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Alveolar bone changes following tooth extraction can compromise prosthodontic rehabilitation. Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) has been proposed to limit these changes and improve prosthodontic and aesthetic outcomes when implants are used.To assess the clinical effects of various materials and techniques for ARP after tooth extraction compared with extraction alone or other methods of ARP, or both, in patients requiring dental implant placement following healing of extraction sockets.The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 22 July 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 22 July 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 22 July 2014), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 22 July 2014), the Meta Register of Current Controlled Trials (to 22 July 2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 22 July 2014), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 22 July 2014), Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 22 July 2014), Scopus (1966 to 22 July 2014), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (1861 to 22 July 2014) and OpenGrey (to 22 July 2014). A number of journals were also handsearched. Trial authors were contacted to identify unpublished randomised controlled trials. There were no restrictions regarding language and date of publication in the searches of the electronic databases.We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of alveolar ridge preservation techniques with at least six months of follow-up. Outcome measures were: changes in the bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge, changes in the vertical height of the alveolar ridge, complications, the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, aesthetic outcomes, implant failure rates, peri-implant marginal bone level changes, changes in probing depths and clinical attachment levels at teeth adjacent to the extraction site, and complications of future prosthodontic rehabilitation.Two review authors extracted data independently and assessed risk of bias for each included trial. Corresponding authors were contacted to obtain missing information. Results were combined using random-effects models with mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables to present the main findings.A total of 50 trials were potentially eligible for inclusion, of which 42 trials were excluded. We included eight RCTs with a total of 233 extraction sites in 184 participants. One trial was judged to be at unclear risk of bias and the remaining trials were at high risk of bias. From two trials comparing xenograft with extraction alone (70 participants, moderate quality evidence), there was some evidence of a reduction in loss of alveolar ridge height (MD -2.60 mm; 95% CI -3.43 to -1.76) and width (MD -1.97 mm; 95% CI -2.48 to -1.46). This was also found in one trial comparing allograft with extraction (24 participants, low quality evidence): ridge height (MD -2.20 mm; 95% CI -0.75 to -3.65) and width (MD - 1.40 mm; 95% CI 0.00 to -2.80) and height. From two RCTs comparing alloplast versus xenograft no evidence was found that either ridge preservation technique caused a smaller reduction in loss of ridge height (MD -0.35 mm; 95% CI -0.86 to 0.16) or width (MD -0.44 mm; 95% CI -0.90 to 0.02; two trials (55 participants); moderate quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there are clinically significant differences between different ARP techniques and extraction based on the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, complications, implant failure, or changes in peri-implant marginal bone levels and probing depths of neighbouring teeth. We found no trials which evaluated parameters relating to clinical attachment levels, specific aesthetic or prosthodontic outcomes.There is limited evidence that ARP techniques may minimise the overall changes in residual ridge height and width six months after extraction. There is also lack of evidence of any differences in implant failure, aesthetic outcomes or any other clinical parameters due to the lack of information or long-term data. There is no convincing evidence of any clinically significant difference between different grafting materials and barriers used for ARP. Further long term RCTs that follow CONSORT guidelines (www.consort-statement.org) are necessary.
13.	Atieh, Momen A., et al. (author) Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development 2021 In: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1465-1858. ; 2021 Review (other academic/artistic)abstract Background: Alveolar bone changes following tooth extraction can compromise prosthodontic rehabilitation. Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) has been proposed to limit these changes and improve prosthodontic and aesthetic outcomes when implants are used. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2015. Objectives: To assess the clinical effects of various materials and techniques for ARP after tooth extraction compared with extraction alone or other methods of ARP, or both, in patients requiring dental implant placement following healing of extraction sockets. Search methods: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 19 March 2021), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2021, Issue 2), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 19 March 2021), Embase Ovid (1980 to 19 March 2021), Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (1982 to 19 March 2021), Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 19 March 2021), Scopus (1966 to 19 March 2021), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (1861 to 19 March 2021), and OpenGrey (to 19 March 2021). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. A number of journals were also handsearched. Selection criteria: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of ARP techniques with at least six months of follow-up. Outcome measures were: changes in the bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge, changes in the vertical height of the alveolar ridge, complications, the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, aesthetic outcomes, implant failure rates, peri-implant marginal bone level changes, changes in probing depths and clinical attachment levels at teeth adjacent to the extraction site, and complications of future prosthodontic rehabilitation. Data collection and analysis: We selected trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. Corresponding authors were contacted to obtain missing information. We estimated mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables to present the main findings and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Main results: We included 16 RCTs conducted worldwide involving a total of 524 extraction sites in 426 adult participants. We assessed four trials as at overall high risk of bias and the remaining trials at unclear risk of bias. Nine new trials were included in this update with six new trials in the category of comparing ARP to extraction alone and three new trials in the category of comparing different grafting materials. ARP versus extraction: from the seven trials comparing xenografts with extraction alone, there is very low-certainty evidence of a reduction in loss of alveolar ridge width (MD -1.18 mm, 95% CI -1.82 to -0.54; P = 0.0003; 6 studies, 184 participants, 201 extraction sites), and height (MD -1.35 mm, 95% CI -2.00 to -0.70; P < 0.0001; 6 studies, 184 participants, 201 extraction sites) in favour of xenografts, but we found no evidence of a significant difference for the need for additional augmentation (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.62; P = 0.39; 4 studies, 154 participants, 156 extraction sites; very low-certainty evidence) or in implant failure rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.90; 2 studies, 70 participants/extraction sites; very low-certainty evidence). From the one trial comparing alloplasts versus extraction, there is very low-certainty evidence of a reduction in loss of alveolar ridge height (MD -3.73 mm; 95% CI -4.05 to -3.41; 1 study, 15 participants, 60 extraction sites) in favour of alloplasts. This single trial did not report any other outcomes. Different grafting materials for ARP: three trials (87 participants/extraction sites) compared allograft versus xenograft, two trials (37 participants, 55 extraction sites) compared alloplast versus xenograft, one trial (20 participants/extraction sites) compared alloplast with and without membrane, one trial (18 participants, 36 extraction sites) compared allograft with and without synthetic cell-binding peptide P-15, and one trial (30 participants/extraction sites) compared alloplast with different particle sizes. The evidence was of very low certainty for most comparisons and insufficient to determine whether there are clinically significant differences between different ARP techniques based on changes in alveolar ridge width and height, the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, or implant failure. We found no trials which evaluated parameters relating to clinical attachment levels, specific aesthetic or prosthodontic outcomes for any of the comparisons. No serious adverse events were reported with most trials indicating that the procedure was uneventful. Among the complications reported were delayed healing with partial exposure of the buccal plate at suture removal, postoperative pain and swelling, moderate glazing, redness and oedema, membrane exposure and partial loss of grafting material, and fibrous adhesions at the cervical part of previously preserved sockets, for the comparisons xenografts versus extraction, allografts versus xenografts, alloplasts versus xenografts, and alloplasts with and without membrane. Authors' conclusions: ARP techniques may minimise the overall changes in residual ridge height and width six months after extraction but the evidence is very uncertain. There is lack of evidence of any differences in the need for additional augmentation at the time of implant placement, implant failure, aesthetic outcomes, or any other clinical parameters due to lack of information or long-term data. There is no evidence of any clinically significant difference between different grafting materials and barriers used for ARP. Further long-term RCTs that follow CONSORT guidelines (www.consort-statement.org) are necessary.
14.	Azaripour, A., et al. (author) SOFT TISSUE SUBSTITUTES AT IMMEDIATE POST-EXTRACTIVE IMPLANTS TO REDUCE TISSUE SHRINKAGE – 3-YEAR RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL 2021 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. - 2784-9015. ; 3:3, s. 47-57 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE. The aim of this parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate whether placement of a soft tissue graft substitute (STGS) could decrease peri-implant tissue shrinkage at immediate post-extractive implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty patients with one missing tooth between two adja-cent healthy teeth in aesthetic areas and at least 4 mm of bone apically to the tooth apex were randomly allocated after tooth extraction to receive or not a subepithelial buccal STGS. Implants were inserted with a torque of at least 30 Ncm and sites were grafted with a cancellous particulate allograft. Ten patients received a buccal STGS and 10 patients did not (control group). All patients were restored with non-occluding immediate provisional screw-retained crowns, replaced after 6 months by definitive metal-ceramic crowns, and were followed to 3-year after grafting/loading. RESULTS. Three-year after loading, no drop-out, crown or implant failure or complication occurred. No statistically significant difference or trends in aesthetics (difference = 0.2, 95% CI:-0.81 to 1.21; P = 0.97), peri-implant marginal bone loss (difference = 0.14 mm; 95% CI:-0.27 to 0.57; P = 0.58) and keratinized mucosa heights (difference = 0.8 mm; 95% CI:-1.79 to 3.39; P = 0.57) between the two groups were observed. CONCLUSIONS. Acknowledging that the sample size was small, no clinical benefits could be observed using a soft tissue graft substitute at immediate post-extractive implants up to 3-year after grafting. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT. The manufacturer (BEGO Implant Systems, Bremen, Germany) of the implants used in this investigation, partially supported this trial, however data belonged to the authors and by no means the sponsor interfered with the conduct of the trial or the publication of its results.
15.	Barausse, C., et al. (author) CRESTAL OR 1.5 MM SUBCRESTAL POSITIONING OF TRANSMUCOSAL DENTAL IMPLANTS WITH CEMENTED OR SCREW-RETAINED CROWNS IN POSTERIOR JAWS: 4-MONTH DATA FROM A SINGLE-CENTRE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL 2020 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. ; 02:02, s. 19-33 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
16.	Barausse, C., et al. (author) IMMEDIATE LOADING OF 3 MM-DIAMETER IMPLANTS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO HORIZONTAL BONE AUGMENTATION FOR PLACING NORMAL DIAMETER IMPLANTS: FOUR-MONTH POST- LOADING RESULTS FROM A MULTICENTRE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL OPEN 2019 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. ; 01 2019:01, s. 51-66 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
17.	Barausse, Carlo, et al. (author) POSTERIOR JAW REHABILITATION USING PARTIAL PROSTHESES SUPPORTED BY IMPLANTS 4.0 X 4.0 MM OR LONGER: THREE-YEAR POST-LOADING RESULTS OF A MULTICENTRE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL 2019 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. - 2784-9015 .- 2785-3039. ; 1, s. 25-36 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE. To evaluate whether 4.0 x 4.0-mm dental implants could be viable alternatives to implants of length at least 8.5 mm when placed in posterior jaws with adequate bone volumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred and fifty patients with posterior (premolar and molar areas) jaws having at least 12.5 mm bone height above the mandibular canal or 11.5 mm below the maxillary sinus, as applicable, were randomised according to a paral-lel-group design and received one to three 4.0 mm-long implants or one to three implants which were at least 8.5 mm-long at three treatment centres. All implants had a diameter of 4.0 mm. Implants were loaded with permanent screw-retained prostheses after 4 months. Patients were followed-up until 3-year post-loading, and outcome measures considered were prosthesis and implant failure, any complications, and changes in pe-ri-implant marginal bone levels. RESULTS. Seventy-five patients were randomly allocated to each group. Drop-outs at 3-year post-loading assessment were five patients from the long implant group and three from the short implant group. Up to 3 years post-loadings, three patients lost one 4.0 mm-long implant each, in comparison to two patients who lost one long implant each (difference in proportion =-0.013; 95% CI:-0.079 to 0.054; P = 1). All failures occurred before loading; failed implants were replaced, delaying delivery of two prostheses in each group by several months (difference in proportion = 0; 95% CI:-0.061 to 0.062; P = 1). Five short-implant patients experienced six complications versus the three complications seen in three long implant patients (difference in proportion =-0.026; 95% CI:-0.103 to 0.053; P = 0.719). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in prosthesis failures, implant failures or complications. Patients with short implants lost on average 0.55 mm of peri-implant bone, and patients with longer implants lost 0.61 mm. There were no statistically significant differences between short and long implants in bone level changes up to 3 years (mean difference = 0.05 mm; 95% CI:-0.05 to 0.16; P = 0.221). CONCLUSIONS. Outcomes 3 years after loading were similar with 4.0 x 4.0 mm-long implants and 8.5 x 4.0 mm or longer implants in posterior jaws, in the presence of adequate bone volumes. However, 5 to 10-year post-loading data will be necessary before reliable recommendations can be made. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT. Global D (Brignais, France) partially supported this trial and donated the implants and prosthetic components. OsteoBiol (Tecnoss, Giaveno, Italy) donated the biomaterials used for bone augmentation. However, the data property belonged to the authors and neither Global D nor OsteoBiol interfered in any way with the conduct of the trial or the publication of the results.
18.	Bolle, C., et al. (author) 4 mm long vs longer implants in augmented bone in posterior atrophic jaws: 1-year post-loading results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial 2018 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:1, s. 31-47 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate whether 4.0 mm short dental implants could be an alternative to augmentation with xenographs in the maxilla and placement of at least 10.0 mm long implants in posterior atrophic jaws. Materials and methods: A group of 40 patients with atrophic posterior (premolar and molar areas) mandibles with 5.0 mm to 6.0 mm bone height above the mandibular canal and 40 patients with atrophic maxillas having 4.0 mm to 5.0 mm below the maxillary sinus, were randomised according to a parallel group design to receive between one and three 4.0 mm long implants or one to three implants of at least 10.0 mm long in augmented bone, at two centres. All implants had a diameter of 4.0 mm or 4.5 mm. Mandibles were vertically augmented with inter-positional equine bone blocks and resorbable barriers. Implants were placed 4 months after the inter-positional grafting. Maxillary sinuses were augmented with particulated porcine bone via a lateral window covered with resorbable barriers, and implants were placed simultaneously. Implants were not submerged and were loaded after 4 months with provisional screw-retained reinforced acrylic restorations replaced after another 4 months by definitive screw-retained metal-composite prostheses. Patients were followed up to 1 year post-loading. Outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, any complication, and peri-implant marginal bone level changes. Results: Three patients dropped out; one from the maxillary augmented group, one from the mandibular augmented group, and one from the maxillary short implant group. In six augmented mandibles (30%) it was not possible to place implants of at least 10.0 mm, so shorter implants were placed instead. In mandibles, one implant from the augmented group failed vs two 4.0 mm implants in two patients from the short implant group. In maxillae, three short implants failed in two patients vs seven long implants in four patients (two long implants and one short implant dropped into the maxillary sinus). Two prostheses on short implants (one mandibular and one maxillary) were placed at a later stage because of implant failures, vs six prostheses (one mandibular and five maxillary) at augmented sites (one mandibular prosthesis not delivered, three maxillary prostheses delivered with delays, one not delivered, and one failed) at augmented sites. In particular, three patients in the augmented group (one mandible and two maxillae) were not wearing a prosthesis. There were no statistically significant differences in implant failures (P (chi-square test) = 0.693; difference in proportion = 0.03; CI 95% -0.11 to 0.17) or prostheses failures (P (chi-square test) = 0.126; difference in proportion = 0.10; CI 95% -0.03 to 0.24). At mandibular sites, nine augmented patients were affected by complications vs two patients treated with short implants (P (chi-square test) = 0.01; difference in proportion = 0.37; CI 95% 0.11 to 0.63), the difference being statistically significant. No significant differences were found for maxillae: nine sinus-lifted patients vs four short implant patients were affected by complications (P (chi-square test) = 0.091; difference in proportion = 0.25; CI 95% -0.03 to 0.53). At 1-year post-loading, average peri-implant bone loss was 0.51 mm at 4 mm long mandibular implants, 0.77 mm at 10 mm or longer mandibular implants, 0.63 mm at short maxillary implants and 0.72 mm at long maxillary implants. The difference was statistically significant in mandibles (mean difference -0.26 mm, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.13, P (ANCOVA) < 0.001), but not in maxillae (mean difference -0.09 mm, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.05, P (ANCOVA) = 0.196). Conclusions: One year after loading 4.0 mm long implants achieved similar results, if not better, than longer implants in augmented jaws, but were affected by fewer complications. Short implants might be a preferable choice over bone augmentation, especially in mandibles, since the treatment is less invasive, faster, cheaper, and associated with less morbidity. However, 5 to 10 years post-loading data are necessary before making reliable recommendations. © 2002-2018 Quintessence Publishing Group.
19.	Bressan, Eriberto, et al. (author) The influence of repeated abutment changes on peri-implant tissue stability: 3-year post-loading results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2017 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:4, s. 373-390 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the influence of at least three abutment disconnections in conventional loaded implants against placement of a definitive abutment in immediately non-occlusal loaded implants on hard and soft tissue changes. A secondary aim was to evaluate whether the presence of less than 2 mm of keratinised mucosa is associated with increased peri-implant marginal bone loss and soft tissue recessions.Eighty patients requiring one single crown or one fixed partial prosthesis supported by a maximum of three implants were randomised, after implants were placed with more than 35 Ncm, according to a parallel group design to receive definitive abutments that were loaded immediately (definitive abutment or immediate loading group) or transmucosal abutments, which were delayed loaded after 3 months and removed at least three times: 1. At impression taking (3 months after implant placement); 2. When checking the zirconium core on titanium abutments at single crowns or the fitting the metal structure at prostheses supported by multiple implants; 3. At delivery of the definitive prostheses (repeated disconnection or conventional loading group). Patients were treated at four centres and each patient contributed to the study, with only one prosthesis followed for 3 years after initial loading. Outcome measures were: prosthesis failures, implant failures, complications, pink aesthetic score (PES), buccal recessions, patient satisfaction, peri-implant marginal bone level changes and height of the keratinised mucosa.Forty patients were randomly allocated to each group according to a parallel group design. Six patients from the definitive abutment group dropped out or died, and one left from the repeated disconnection group. One implant, from the repeated disconnection group, fractured (difference = 3%; CI 95%: -2%, 8%; P = 1). Four provisional crowns and one definitive single crown had to be remade because of poor fitting, and one definitive crown and one definitive prosthesis because of ceramic and implant fracture, respectively, in the repeated disconnection group vs one provisional prosthesis from the definitive abutment group due to frequent debondings (difference = 15%; CI 95%: 2%, 28%; P = 0.060). Five patients from the definitive abutment group and four patients from the repeated disconnection group were affected by complications (difference = 4%; CI 95%: -11%, 20%; P = 0.725). PES scores assessed at 3 years post-loading were 11.7 (standard deviation = 1.8) mm for the definitive abutment group and 11.3 (1.5) mm for the repeated abutment changes group (difference = 0.4; CI 95%: -0.4, 1.2; P = 0.315). However, there was a difference of 0.26 out of a maximum score of 2 in favour of the definitive abutment group for soft tissue contour only. Buccal recessions at 3 years post-loading amounted to -0.1 (0.8) mm for the definitive abutment group and -0.1 (1.2) mm for the repeated abutment changes group (it was actually a soft tissue gain; difference = 0.01 mm CI 95%: -0.48, 0.50; P = 0.965). All patients declared being very satisfied or satisfied with the function and aesthetics of the prostheses and said they would undergo the same procedure again, with the exception of one patient from the repeated disconnection group who was uncertain regarding function. Mean peri-implant marginal bone loss 3 years after loading was 0.07 (0.18) mm for the definitive abutment group and 0.50 (0.93) mm for the repeated abutment changes group (difference = 0.43 mm; CI 95%: 0.13, 0.74; P = 0.007). The height of keratinised mucosa at 3 years post-loading was 2.8 (1.3) mm for the definitive abutment group and 2.8 (1.6) mm for the repeated abutment changes group (difference = 0.03; CI 95%: -0.67, 0.73; P = .926). Up to 3 years after initial loading there were no statistically significant differences between the two procedures, with the exception of 0.4 mm more marginal bone loss at implants subjected to three abutment disconnections. There were no significantly increased marginal bone loss (difference = 0.1 mm, CI 95%: -0.3, 0.5, P = 0.590) or buccal recessions (difference = 0.1 mm, CI 95%: -0.4, 0.7, P = 0.674) at implants with less than 2 mm of keratinised mucosa at loading.Three-year post-loading data showed that repeated abutment disconnections significantly increased bone loss of 0.43 mm, but this difference may not be considered clinically relevant; therefore clinicians can use the procedure they find more convenient for each specific patient. Immediately non-occlusally loaded dental implants are a viable alternative to conventional loading and no increased bone loss or buccal recessions were noticed at implants with less than 2 mm of keratinised mucosa. Conflict of interest statement: This trial was partially funded by Dentsply Sirona Implants, the manufacturer of the implants and other products evaluated in this investigation. However, data belonged to the authors and by no means did the manufacturer interfere with the conduct of the trial or the publication of the results, with the exception of rejecting a proposal to change the protocol, after the trial was started, allowing the use of indexed abutments.
20.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Augmentation of the posterior atrophic edentulous maxilla with implants placed in the ulna: A prospective single-blind controlled clinical trial 2007 In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS. - 0882-2786. ; 22:2, s. 280-288 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
21.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Early implant loading in the atrophic posterior maxilla: 1-stage lateral versus crestal sinus lift and 8mm hydroxyapatite-coated implants. A 5-year randomised controlled trial 2013 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406 .- 1756-2414. ; 6:1, s. 13-25 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of long implants (10-16 mm) inserted in maxillary sinuses augmented according to a lateral approach versus short (8 mm) implants placed in crestally augmented sinuses, early loaded after 45 days. Materials and methods: Forty partially or fully edentulous patients having 3 to 6mm of residual crestal height and at least 4mm in thickness below the maxillary sinuses were randomised according to a parallel group design to receive either one to three 10 to 16 mm-long hydroxyapatite-coated implants (20 patients) after lateral sinus lifting with 50% anorganic bovine (Bio-Oss) and 50% autogenous bone, or 8mm implants (20 patients) after crestal sinus lifting with autogenous bone. Implants were submerged and left healing for 45 days before loading the implants. Within 1 week after abutment connection, implants were loaded with screw-retained full acrylic provisional prostheses. Definitive metal-ceramic prostheses were provisionally cemented 45 days after abutment connection. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, and radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level changes. In addition, the stability of individual implants was assessed with Osstell and Periotest at abutment connection (baseline), and at 1 and 5 years after loading by blinded outcome assessors. All patients were followed up to 5 years after loading. Results: One patient dropped out (death) from the longer implant group. One implant failed in the short implant group versus 5 implants in 3 patients of the longer implant group. The difference was not statistically significant. Four complications occurred in 4 patients of the short implant group versus 8 complications in 7 patients of the long implant group, the difference being not statistically significantly different. However, the 2 major postoperative complications occurred in the longer implant group: 1 abscess, and 1 sinusitis that led to the complete failure of the treatment in 2 patients (4 implants lost). A total of 0.72 mm of peri-implant marginal bone was lost after 5 years at long implants and 0.41 mm at short implants, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P = 0.028). Osstell values increased and Periotest decreased over time and there were no differences between groups at any time points. Conclusions: In atrophic maxillary sinuses with a residual bone height of 3 to 6mm, 8 mm short implants placed in a simultaneously crestally lifted sinus might be a preferable choice than a 1-stage lateral sinus lift for placing longer implants since they appear to be associated with less morbidity. If these implants are placed with an insertion torque >35 Ncm and are joined together under the same prosthesis, they can be early loaded at 6 weeks.
22.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) EARLY IMPLANT LOADING IN THE ATROPHIC POSTERIOR MAXILLA: AN 11-YEAR RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF 1-STAGE LATERAL VERSUS CRESTAL SINUS LIFT AND 8-MM-LONG HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED IMPLANTS 2020 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. ; 02:03, s. 45-60 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
23.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate functional loading of implants placed with flapless surgery in the edentulous maxilla: 1-year follow-up of a single cohort study 2007 In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS. - 0882-2786. ; 22:1, s. 87-95 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
24.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate Functional Loading of Implants Placed with Flapless Surgery Versus Conventional Implants in Partially Edentulous Patients: A 3-Year Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial 2008 In: International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. - 0882-2786. ; 16:4, s. 391-402 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
25.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of 2 (all-on-2) flapless-placed mandibular implants supporting cross-arch fixed prostheses: interim data from a 1-year follow-up prospective single cohort study. 2012 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 5:1, s. 49-58 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the clinical outcome of 2 implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prosthesis 1 year after loading.Eighty consecutive patients were recruited. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 80 Ncm. Outcome measures, evaluated by two independent assessors, were prosthesis and implant failures, complications, marginal bone level changes, implant stability quotient (ISQ) values and patient satisfaction.Flaps were raised in 7 patients. Twelve implants in 7 patients did not reach the planned insertion torque. Four implants in 3 patients were immediately replaced by larger diameter implants and achieved the desired torque, whereas the remaining implants were immediately loaded anyway. Two implants failed early in 2 patients, but were successfully replaced and their prostheses remade. One month after loading, 72 (90%) patients declared to be completely satisfied with the therapy, 7 (9%) partially satisfied and 1 (1%) unsatisfied. One year after loading, all prostheses were in function, though one patient did not attend the 1-year control. Eight (10%) complications occurred, all successfully treated. After 1 year, the mean marginal bone loss was 0.3 mm and mean ISQ values decreased from 75.4 to 72.4.These short-term results at 1 year after loading suggest that immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses can be supported by only 2 dental implants. Longer follow-ups (around 10 years) are needed to know the prognosis of this treatment modality.
26.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of 2(all-on-2) versus 4 (all-on-4) implants placed with a flapless technique supporting mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses: 1-year results from a pilot randomised controlled trial. 2013 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 6:2, s. 121-31 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the outcome of 2 versus 4 implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.Sixty patients from two different centres were randomised: 30 to the allon- 2 group and 30 to the all-on-4 group according to a parallel group design. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 40 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and marginal bone level changes.Flaps were raised in 18 patients. A total of 2 implants in 2 patients did not reach the planned insertion torque and were immediately replaced by larger diameter ones. One year after loading, no drop-out or implant failure occurred. Eight biomechanical complications occurred in the all-on-2 group versus 8 complications in the all-on-4 group. There were no statistically significant differences for complications between groups. There were no statistically significant differences for marginal peri-implant bone levels between the two groups (estimate of the difference = -0.16; 95%CI -0.40 to 0.08; P (ANCOVA) = 0.074), with both groups losing a statistically significant amount of marginal bone (0.74 mm for all-on-2 implants and 0.58 mm for all-on-4 implants). There were statistically significant differences between the two centres, with more bone being lost for the Bologna centre (0.26 mm versus 1.07 mm).These preliminary results, up to 1 year after loading, suggest that immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses can be supported by only 2 dental implants. Longer followups (approximately 10 years) are needed to properly evaluate this therapeutic option.
27.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of 2 (all-on-2) versus 4 (all-on-4) implants placed with a flapless technique supporting mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses: preliminary results from a pilot randomised controlled trial. 2011 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 4:3, s. 205-17 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the clinical outcome of 2 implants versus 4 implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.Sixty patients from two different centres were randomised: 30 to the allon- 2 group and 30 to the all-on-4 group. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 40 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, and biological and biomechanical complications.Flaps were raised in 18 patients. Two implants in 2 patients did not reach the planned insertion torque and were immediately replaced by larger diameter ones. Four months after loading, no drop-out or implant failure occurred. One biomechanical complication occurred in the all-on-2 group versus 4 in the all-on-4 group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups for complications. There were no differences between centres.These very preliminary results, just 4 months after loading, suggest that immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch fixed dental prostheses can be supported by only 2 dental implants. Longer follow-ups (around 10 years) are needed to understand whether cross-arch mandibular prostheses can be successfully supported by only 2 dental implants.
28.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of bimaxillary total fixed prostheses supported by five flapless-placed implants with machined surfaces: A 6-month follow-up prospective single cohort study 2016 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 9:1, s. 67-74 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcome of fully edentulous patients rehabilitated with immediately loaded bimaxillary screw-retained metal-resin prostheses supported by five implants placed flapless: two in the mandible and three in the maxillae. Materials and methods: Twenty-five consecutively treated patients were recruited. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 80 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, and complications. Results: Six months after loading no patients dropped out and no prosthesis or implant failed. Two maxillary prostheses were loaded early at 8 weeks because implants were inserted with a torque inferior to 45 Ncm. Three complications occurred in two patients but they were all successfully treated. Conclusions: Six months after loading, immediately loaded bimaxillary cross-arch prostheses can be supported by only two mandibular and three maxillary flapless-placed dental implants. Longer follow-ups of approximately 10 years are needed to understand the prognosis of this treatment modality.
29.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of fixed cross-arch prostheses supported by flapless-placed 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants: 5-year results from a randomised controlled trial. 2018 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:3, s. 295-306 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To compare the outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported either by 5 mm long or 11.5 mm long implants placed flapless and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.Thirty patients with edentulous or to-be- rendered edentulous mandibles, and 30 with edentulous maxillas, having sufficient bone to allow the placement of four and six implants respectively, of at least 11.5 mm long, were randomised according to a parallel group design into two equal groups and received either 5 mm or 11.5 mm long implants at one centre. Implants had a diameter of 5 mm, were to be placed flapless, and with an insertion torque of at least 50 Ncm. Mandibles received four implants between the mental foramina. Implants were to be immediately loaded with metal-resin definitive prostheses the same day as implant placement. Patients were followed to 5 years post-loading and the outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.Four patients per group dropped out. Two prostheses were remade, one on short maxillary implants and one on long mandibular implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.15; P = 1.000). Three patients lost six short implants vs three patients who lost four long implants (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.19; P = 1.000). Four short implant patients were affected by complications vs five patients with long implants (difference in proportions = 0.04; 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.25; P = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for prostheses failures, implant failures and complications. Patients with mandibular short implants lost on average 0.22 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years while patients with long mandibular implants lost 0.83 mm. Patients with maxillary short implants lost on average 0.30 mm of peri-implant bone at 5 years and patients with long maxillary implants lost 0.89 mm. Short implants showed less bone loss when compared with long implants and the differences up to 5 years were statistically significant both in maxillae (mean difference = 0.59 mm, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.86 mm, P < .0001) and in mandibles (mean difference = 0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.86 mm, P < 0.0001).Flapless-placed 5 mm long implants achieved similar results as 11.5 mm long implants when supporting immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses both in maxillae and mandibles up to 5 years after loading. These results must be confirmed by other trials, and 10 years post-loading data is necessary before making reliable recommendations.
30.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of fixed cross-arch prostheses supported by flapless-placed supershort or long implants: 1-year results from a randomised controlled trial 2015 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 8:1, s. 27-36 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To compare the outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported either by supershort (5 mm) or long (11.5 mm) implants, placed flapless and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses. Materials and methods: Thirty patients with edentulous (or to be rendered edentulous) mandibles and 30 with edentulous maxillas, who had sufficient bone to allow the placement of four and six implants respectively, which were at least 11.5 mm-long, were randomised according to a parallel group design into 2 equal groups, where they received either 5 mm or 11.5 mm-long implants at one centre. Implants with a diameter of 5 mm, were to be placed flapless with an insertion torque of at least 50 Ncm. Mandibles received four implants between the mental foramina. Implants were to be immediately loaded with metal-resin-definitive prostheses on the same day of implant placement. Patients were followed up to 1 year after loading and the outcome measures were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and pen-implant marginal bone level changes. Results: No patients dropped-out. Two prostheses were remade, one on short maxillary implants and one on long mandibular implants. Two 5 mm maxillary implants which did not achieve 50 Ncm torque in soft bone of one patient, but were immediately loaded anyway, failed after 3 weeks compared to one mandibular 11.5 mm-long implant that failed after 60 days. Two complications occurred in each group. There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis failures, implant failures and complications. Patients with mandibular short implants lost on average 0.08 mm of pen-implant bone at 1 year and patients with long mandibular implants lost 0.51 mm. Patients with short maxillary implants lost on average 0.15 mm of pen-implant bone at 1 year and patients with long maxillary implants lost 0.62 mm. Short implants showed less bone loss when compared to long implants and the differences up to 1 year were statistically significant both in maxillae (mean difference = 0.48 mm, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73, P = 0.0011) and in mandibles (mean difference = 0.44 mm, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.66, P = 0.0009). Conclusions: Flapless-placed 5 mm-long implants achieved similar results as 11.5 mm-long implants when supporting immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses both in maxillae and mandibles up to 1 year after loading. These preliminary results must be confirmed by other trials, and 5- to 10-year post-loading data is necessary before making reliable recommendations.
31.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate loading of one (fixed-on-1) versus two (fixed-on-2) implants placed flapless supporting mandibular screw-retained cross-arch fixed prostheses: 10-month results from an explanatory randomised controlled trial. 2019 In: International journal of oral implantology (New Malden, London, England). - 2631-6439. ; 12:1, s. 89-102 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the outcome of one (fixed-on-1, Fo1) versus two (fixed-on-2, Fo2) implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses.Twenty patients with edentulous or to be rendered edentulous mandibles were randomised to the Fo1 group (10 patients who received three intraforaminal implants but only the mesial implant was actually loaded) and to the Fo2 group (10 patients who received two intraforaminal implants) according to a parallel-group design. To be immediately loaded implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 60 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications and patient satisfaction for function and aesthetics evaluated up to 10 months post-loading.Flaps were raised in three patients of the Fo1 group and one of the Fo2 group. Two prostheses in each group were delayed loaded at 2 and 3 months, because implants could not be inserted with a torque superior to 60 Ncm. Patients of the Fo2 group received prostheses with 12 teeth whereas Fo1 patients with 8 or 10 teeth. Ten months after loading no drop-out or implant failure occurred, but one Fo2 prosthesis had to be remade because the patient complained it was too short (risk difference = 0.1; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.40; Fisher's exact test P = 1.000). Three patients were affected by complications in each group (risk difference = 0.0; 95% CI: -0.359 to 0.359; Fisher's exact test; P = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for prosthetic failures and complications between groups. Four months after loading, patients of the Fo1 group were less satisfied for function than those of the Fo2 group (difference between the medians [Hodges-Lehmann estimation] = 1; 95% CI: 0 to 2; P = 0.043). No differences were observed for aesthetics (difference between the medians [Hodges-Lehmann estimation] = 0; 95% CI: -1 to 0; P = 0.481), and two Fo1 patients would not undergo the same procedure again (difference in proportions: 0.2; 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.51; P = 0.474).Preliminary results suggest that immediately loaded cross-arch screw-retained fixed prostheses with 8 to 10 teeth can be supported by only one dental implant at least up to 10 months post-loading; however, the clinical application and usefulness of such a procedure remains questionable.
32.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of two (fixed-on-2) versus three (fixed-on-3) implants placed flapless supporting cross-arch fixed prostheses: One-year results from a randomised controlled trial 2016 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 9:2, s. 143-153 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the outcome of two (fixed-on-2 = FO2) versus three (fixed-on-3 = FO3) implants placed flapless in fully edentulous jaws and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained crossarch prostheses. Materials and methods: Forty edentulous or to be rendered edentulous patients (20 in the maxilla and 20 in the mandible) were randomised to the FO2 group (20 patients: 10 in the maxilla and 10 in the mandible) and to the FO3 group (20 patients: 10 in the maxilla and 10 in the mandible) according to a parallel group design. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 60 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications and peri-implant marginal bone level changes evaluated up to 1-year post-loading. Results: Flaps were raised in four patients and two prostheses were loaded early at 8 weeks in the FO2 group. One year after loading no dropout or implant failure occurred, however one FO2 maxillary prosthesis had to be remade because of repeated screw-loosening (risk difference = 0.05; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.15; Fisher's exact test P = 1.000). Three FO2 patients were affected by complications versus five FO3 patients (risk difference = -0.1; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.15; Fisher's exact test; P = 0.695). There were no statistically significant differences for prosthetic failures and complications between groups. There were no statistically significant differences for marginal peri-implant bone levels between the two groups (estimate of the difference = 0.031 mm; 95% Cl: -0.22 to 0.28; P (ancova) = 0.803), with both groups losing marginal bone in a statistically significant way (0.27 mm for FO2 patients and 0.24 mm for FO3 patients). Conclusions: These preliminary results suggest that immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses can be supported by only two or three dental implants at least up to 1-year post-loading. Longer follow-ups are needed to properly evaluate both these therapeutic options.
33.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of two (fixed-on-2) vs four (fixed-on-4) implants placed with a flapless technique supporting mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses: 3-year results from a pilot randomised controlled trial 2017 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:2, s. 133-145 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the outcome of two vs four implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 patients from two different centres were randomised: 30 to the fixed-on-2 group and 30 to the fixed-on-4 group according to a parallel group design. To be immediately loaded implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 40 Newton/cm (Ncm). Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and marginal bone level changes. Results: Flaps were raised in 18 patients. Two implants in two patients did not reach the planned insertion torque and were replaced immediately by larger diameter ones. Three years after loading, two patients dropped out from the fixed-on-2 group and one from the fixed-on-4 group. No implant failure or prosthetic failure occurred. A total of 12 fixed-on-2 patients were affected by one complication each vs 13 fixed-on-4 patients. There were no statistically significant differences for complications between groups (difference in proportion = -0.03; 95% CI -29 to 0.22; P [Fisher's exact test] = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences for marginal peri-implant bone loss between the two groups (mean difference = 0.14; CI 95% -0.17 to 0.45; P [ANCOVA] = 0.356), with both groups losing marginal bone in a statistically significant way (1.70 mm for fixed-on-2 implants and 1.56 mm for fixed-on-4 implants). There were statistically significant differences between the two centres, with more bone being lost for the Bologna centre (2.18 vs 1.13 mm; P (ANCOVA) < 0.001). Conclusions: Up to 3 years after loading, these preliminary results suggest that immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch fixed prostheses can be supported by only two dental implants. Longer follow-ups (about 10 years) are needed to properly evaluate this therapeutic option.
34.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of two flapless placed mandibular implants supporting cross-arch fixed prostheses: A 3-year follow-up prospective single cohort study 2014 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 7:1, s. 89-98 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcome of two implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with a metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses 3 years after loading. Materials and methods: Eighty consecutively patients were recruited. Implants for immediate loading had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 80 Ncm. Outcome measures, evaluated by two independent assessors, were: prosthesis and implant failures, complications, marginal bone level changes, implant stability quotient (ISQ) values and patient satisfaction. Results: Three years after loading, all prostheses were in function although one patient did not come back for the 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Two implants failed early in two patients, but were successfully replaced and their prostheses remade. Twelve complications occurred in 10 patients but were all successfully treated. After 3 years, mean marginal bone loss was 0.43 mm, mean ISO values decreased from 75.4 to 75.3, and all but four patients were fully satisfied with the therapy. Four patients were partially satisfied because, lacking molars, they could not chew as they wished. Conclusion: Immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch partial dentures can be supported by only two dental implants up to 3 years. Longer follow-ups (around 10 years) are needed to know the prognosis of this treatment modality.
35.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Immediate loading of two flapless placed mandibular implants supporting cross-arch fixed prostheses: A 5-year follow-up prospective single cohort study 2016 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 9:2, s. 165-177 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcome of two implants placed flapless in fully edentulous mandibles and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses 5 years after loading. Materials and methods: Eighty consecutive patients were recruited. To be immediately loaded, implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 80 Ncm. Forty-six laser-welded titanium and 34 cast silver-palladium frameworks with resin teeth were initially delivered within 8 and 48 h, respectively. Outcome measures, evaluated by two independent assessors included prosthesis and implant failures, complications, marginal bone level changes, implant stability quotient (ISQ) values and patient satisfaction. Results: Five years after loading one patient did not return to the control and 10 prostheses were remade. Two implants failed early in two patients, but they were successfully replaced. Thirty-six complications occurred in 28 patients but were all successfully treated. After 5 years, mean marginal bone loss was 0.69 mm, mean ISQ values decreased from 75.4 to 73.8, and all patients were fully satisfied with the therapy. A post-hoc comparison between the outcome of laser-welded and cast frameworks showed that laser-welded frameworks were affected by significantly more complications (19 patients out of 46 and 6 patients out of 34, respectively; difference in proportion = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.43; Pearson's chi-square test, P = 0.032), therefore such a framework construction should be considered as a long-term temporary prosthesis and not a definitive prosthesis. Conclusions: Immediately loaded mandibular cross-arch prostheses can be supported by only two implants up to 5 years, if made with a robust cast framework. Longer follow-ups (around 10 years) are still needed to know the prognosis of this treatment modality.
36.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate occlusal versus non-occlusal loading of single zirconia implants. A multicentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial. 2010 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:2, s. 111-20 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE: To evaluate whether immediate non-occlusal loading of single zirconia implants could reduce early failures when compared to immediate occlusal loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty partially edentulous patients who received one single zirconia implant (Z-Systems) at least 10 mm long and 3.25 mm wide inserted with a torque of at least 35 Ncm were randomised to immediate occlusal or non-occlusal loading groups. All patients received provisional acrylic crowns the same day of implant placement. Provisional crowns were replaced after 4 to 5 months by definitive full ceramic crowns. Outcome measures were implant success, any complications and peri-implant marginal bone levels. RESULTS: One year after loading, no patients had dropped out. Five implants (12.5%) failed early: three occlusally loaded and two non-occlusally loaded. Three complications occurred, all after delivery of the definitive crowns: one crown fractured (occlusal loading), one had to be remade after debridement because of hyperplastic tissues (occlusal loading), and one crown decemented (nonocclusal loading). These differences were not statistically significant. Both groups gradually lost periimplant bone in a highly statistically significant way. One year after loading, patients subjected to non-occlusal loading lost an average of 0.7 mm of peri-implant bone versus 0.9 mm in the occlusal group. This difference in bone loss between groups was not statistically significant. There was an association between immediate post-extractive implants and implant failures (P=0.01). Four of the 10 immediate post-extractive implants (40%) failed versus one out of 30 delayed implants (3%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not provide a conclusive answer to whether immediate non-occlusal loading may decrease implant failures. Immediately loaded zirconia implants placed in post-extractive sites had high failure rates.
37.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Immediate vs early loading of 6.6 mm flapless-placed single implants: 9 years after-loading report of a split-mouth randomised controlled trial. 2018 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:2, s. 163-173 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of 6.6 mm long flapless-placed single implants loaded immediately or early loaded at 6 weeks.Thirty patients each received two single Nanotite External Hex Biomet 3i implants, which were then randomly allocated to be either immediately or early loaded, according to a split-mouth design. Implants had to be inserted with a torque superior to 40 Ncm. Provisional crowns were put in slight occlusal contact and replaced by definitive crowns 3 months after loading. Patients were followed for 9 years after loading. Outcome measures were implant failures, biological and biomechanical complications, peri-implant marginal bone level changes and patient preference.A total of 29 implants were immediately loaded, while 31 were early loaded. Nine years after loading, three patients dropped out. One implant failed in each group within 2 months after loading. One patient asked for the immediately loaded crown to be remade for aesthetic reasons and then again to have both metal-ceramic crowns replaced by full ceramic crowns. Another patient had his immediately loaded crown remade after repeated debonding. Six patients from each group experienced complications, the difference being not statistically significant (difference of proportions = 0.00; 95% CI -0.20 to 0.20, P = 1.000). Peri-implant bone loss was 0.60 mm for patients with immediately loaded implants and 0.46 mm for early loaded ones, which was not significantly different (mean difference = 0.14 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.41, P = 0.283). All but one patient had no preference for either procedure after 9 years.Flapless-placed 6.6 mm long single implants can be immediately loaded and remain successful up to 9 years after loading. Conflict-of-interest statement:
38.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) Machined versus roughened immediately loaded and finally restored single implants inserted flapless: Preliminary 6-month data from a split-mouth randomised controlled trial 2016 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 9:2, s. 155-163 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To compare the outcome of immediately loaded single implants with a machined or a roughened surface. Materials and methods: Fifty patients had two implant sites randomly allocated to receive flapless-placed single Syra implants (Sweden & Martina), one with a machined and one with a roughened surface (sand-blasted with zirconia powder and acid etched), according to a split-mouth design. To be loaded immediately, implants had to be inserted with a torque superior to 50 Ncm. Implants were restored with definitive crowns in direct occlusal contact within 48 h. Patients were followed for 6 months after loading. Outcome measures were prosthetic and implant failures and complications. Results: Two machined implants and four roughened implants were not loaded immediately. Six months after loading no dropout occurred. One implant loaded late, which had a rough implant surface, failed 20 days after loading (P (McNemar test) = 0.625; difference in proportions = -0.04; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.07). Three crowns had to be remade on machined implants and four on roughened implants (P (McNemar test) = 1.000; difference in proportions = -0.02; 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.08). Three machined and five roughened implants experienced complications (P (McNemar test) = 0.625; difference in proportions = -0.04; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.07). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for crown and implant losses as well as complications. Conclusions: Up to 6 months after loading both machined and roughened flapless-placed and immediately loaded single implants provided good and similar results, however, longer follow-ups are needed to evaluate the long-term prognosis of implants with different surfaces.
39.	Cannizzaro, G., et al. (author) SINGLE IMPLANTS SUPPORTING A 3-UNIT CANTILEVERED MAXILLARY PROSTHESIS: A PROSPECTIVE CASE SERIES WITH 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP 2020 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. ; 02:02, s. 63-70 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
40.	Cannizzaro, Gioacchino, et al. (author) Two or three machined vs roughened surface dental implants loaded immediately supporting total fixed prostheses: 1-year results from a randomised controlled trial. 2017 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:3, s. 279-291 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To compare implants with machined vs roughened surfaces placed flapless in totally edentulous jaws and immediately restored with metal-resin screw-retained cross-arch prostheses. Mandibles were rehabilitated with two implants (Fixed-on-2 or Fo2) and maxillae with three implants (Fixed-on-3 or Fo3).Forty edentulous or to be rendered edentulous patients (20 in the mandible and 20 in the maxilla) were randomised to the machined group (20 patients: 10 mandibles and 10 maxillae) and to the roughened group (20 patients: 10 mandibles and 10 maxillae) according to a parallel group design. To be immediately loaded implants had to be inserted with a minimum torque of 60 Ncm. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications and peri-implant marginal bone level changes evaluated up to 1 year post-loading.Flaps were raised in four patients from the machined group. Four prostheses on machined implants and three on roughened implants were delayed for loading because a sufficient insertion torque was not obtained. There were no dropouts 1 year after loading. Two maxillary machined implants were lost in two patients (difference in proportions = 0.10; 95% CI = -0.03 to 0.23; P (Fisher's exact test) = 0.487); one maxillary Fo3 prosthesis on machined implants and one mandibular Fo2 prosthesis on roughened implants had to be remade (difference in proportions = 0; 95% CI = -0.14 to 0.14; P (Fisher's exact test) = 1.000). Five patients with machined implants had six complications vs seven patients who had eight complications at roughened implants (difference in proportions = -0.10; 95% CI = -0.38 to 0.18; P (Fisher's exact test) = 0.731). There were no statistically significant differences for implant failures, prosthetic failures or complications between groups. There were no statistically significant differences for marginal peri-implant bone levels between the two groups (estimate of the difference = -0.06 mm; 95% CI = -0.23 to 0.10; P (ANCOVA) = 0.445), with both groups losing marginal bone in a statistically significant way (0.35 ± 0.23 mm for machined and 0.42 ± 0.27 mm for roughened surface).These preliminary results suggest that immediately loaded cross-arch prostheses can be supported by only two mandibular or three maxillary dental implants at least up to 1 year post-loading, independently of the type of implant surface used. Longer follow-ups are needed to understand whether one of the two-implant surfaces is preferable.
41.	Capelli, Matteo, et al. (author) A 5-year report from a multicentre randomised clinical trial: immediate non-occlusal versus early loading of dental implants in partially edentulous patients 2010 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:3, s. 209-219 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE: To compare peri-implant bone and soft-tissue levels of immediately non-occlusally loaded versus non-submerged early loaded implants in partially edentulous patients 5 years after implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients were randomised in five Italian private practices: 25 in the immediately loaded group and 27 in the early loaded group. To be immediately loaded, single implants had to be inserted with a torque of > 30 Ncm, and splinted implants with a torque of > 20 Ncm. Immediately loaded implants were provided with non-occluding temporary restorations within 48 hours. After 2 months, the provisional restorations were put in full occlusion. Implants were early loaded after 2 months. Final restorations were provided 8 months after implant placement. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures as well as biological and prosthetic complications recorded by non-blinded assessors. Blinded assessors evaluated peri-implant bone and soft-tissue levels. RESULTS: Fifty-two implants were immediately loaded and 52 early loaded. One patient of the early loaded group dropped out after the 1-year recall. One single immediately loaded implant failed 2 months after placement. Only one complication (iatrogenic peri-implantitis) occurred in one patient of the early loading group. Both groups gradually lost peri-implant bone in a highly statistically significant way at 2, 8 and 14 months and at 4 and 5 years. After 5 years, patients of both groups had lost an average of 1.2 mm of peri-implant marginal bone. There were no statistically significant differences in peri-implant bone and soft-tissue level changes between the 2 groups. At 5 years, there was a statistically significant recession (0.2 mm) of the vestibular soft tissues from baseline (delivery of the final restorations 8 months after implant placement) only for immediately loaded implants. CONCLUSIONS: In well maintained patients, complications are uncommon and healthy and stable periimplant tissues can be maintained for 5 years around immediately and early loaded implants.
42.	Cavalcanti, Raffaele, et al. (author) The influence of smoking on the survival of dental implants: a 5-year pragmatic multicentre retrospective cohort study of 1727 patients. 2011 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 4:1, s. 39-45 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate the influence of cigarette smoking on the survival of dental implants with a retrospective observational study of 5 years.
43.	Checchi, Luigi, et al. (author) Crestal sinus lift for implant rehabilitation: a randomised clinical trial comparing the Cosci and the Summers techniques. A preliminary report on complications and patient preference 2010 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 3:3, s. 221-232 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of two different techniques to lift the maxillary sinus via a crestal approach: the Summers versus the Cosci technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen partially edentulous patients missing bilaterally maxillary molars and/ or premolars having 4 to 7 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5 mm thickness below the maxillary sinuses measured on computed tomography scans were randomised to have implants placed in sinuses crestally lifted according to the Cosci or Summers technique with bone substitutes according to a split-mouth design. Implants were left to heal submerged for 6 months. Implants were loaded with acrylic provisional crowns/prostheses. Screw-retained definitive metal-ceramic prostheses were delivered 4 months after provisional loading. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, any complications, operation time, operator preference, and patient preference assessed 1 month after surgery and 1 month after delivery of the final prostheses by a blinded outcome assessor. All patients were followed up to 5 months after loading (1 year after implant placement). RESULTS: Nineteen study implants were placed according to each technique. No patient dropped out and no implant failed. No discomfort/complications occurred at sites treated with the Cosci technique whereas 12 patients reported discomfort during the augmentation procedure at the side treated with the Summers technique, this was statistically significant, and in one of these patients a perforation of the sinus membrane occurred. Postoperatively, headache was reported by nine patients and swelling occurred in three of these patients at the Summers treated sides. Statistically significantly less time was required to place implants according to the Cosci technique (33 versus 24 minutes, on average). The two operators and 14 out of 15 patients preferred the Cosci technique. CONCLUSIONS: Both crestal sinus lift techniques were successful but the Cosci technique required less surgical time, produced less intra- and postoperative morbidity and was preferred by patients.
44.	Checchi, V., et al. (author) Wide diameter immediate post-extractive implants vs delayed placement of normal-diameter implants in preserved sockets in the molar region: 1-year postloading outcome of a randomised controlled trial 2017 In: European Journal of Oral Implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 10:3, s. 263-278 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of 6.0 to 8.0 mm-wide diameter implants, placed immediately after tooth extraction, with conventional 4.0 or 5.0 mm diameter implants placed in a preserved socket after a 4-month period of healing in the molar region. Materials and Methods: Just after extraction of one or two molar teeth, and with no vertical loss of the buccal bone in relation to the palatal wall, 100 patients requiring immediate post-extractive implants were randomly allocated to immediate placement of one or two 6.0 to 8.0 mm-wide diameter implants (immediate group; 50 patients) or for socket preservation using a porcine bone substitute covered by a resorbable collagen barrier (delayed group; 50 patients), according to a parallel group design in one centre. Bone-to-implant gaps were filled with autogenous bone retrieved with a trephine drill used to prepare the implant sites for the immediate wide diameter post-extractive implants. Four months after socket preservation, one to two 4.0 or 5.0 mm-wide delayed implants were placed. Implants were loaded 4 months after placement with fixed provisional restorations in acrylic, and replaced after 4 months by fixed, definitive, metal-ceramic restorations. Patients were followed to 1 year after loading. Outcome measures were: implant failures, complications, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES), peri-implant marginal bone level changes, patient satisfaction, number of appointments and surgical interventions recorded, when possible, by blinded assessors. Results: Three patients dropped out 1 year after loading from the immediate group vs six from the delayed group. Five implants out of 47 failed in the immediate group (10.6%) vs two out 44 (4.6%) in the delayed group, the difference being not statistically significant (difference in proportion = 6.0%, 95% CI: -8.8% to 20.8%, P = 0.436). In the immediate group 10 patients were affected by 10 complications, while in the delayed group four patients were affected by four complications. The difference was not statistically significant (difference in proportion = 12%, 95% CI: -2% to 26%, P = 0.084). At delivery of the definitive prostheses, 4 months after loading, the mean total PES score was 9.65 ± 1.62 and 10.44 ± 1.47 in the immediate and delayed groups, respectively. At 1 year after loading, the mean total PES score was 9.71 ± 2.71 and 10.86 ± 1.37 in the immediate and delayed groups, respectively. The Total PES score was statistically significantly better at delayed implants both at 4 months (mean difference = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.05 to 1.53; P = 0.03) and at 1 year (mean difference = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.13 to 2.17; P = 0.02). Marginal bone levels at implant insertion (after bone grafting) were 0.04 mm for immediate and 0.11 mm for delayed implants, which was statistically significantly different (mean difference = 0.07; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.12; P < 0.0001). One year after loading, patients in the immediate group lost on average 1.06 mm and those from the delayed group 0.63 mm, the difference being statistically significant (mean difference = 0.43 mm; 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.61; P < 0.0001). All patients were fully or partially satisfied both for function and aesthetics, and would undergo the same procedure again both at 4 months and 1 year after loading. Patients from the immediate group required on average 7.48 ± 1.45 visits to the clinician and 2.14 ± 0.49 surgical interventions and to have their definitive prostheses delivered vs 10.30 ± 0.99 visits and 3.08 ± 0.40 surgical interventions for the delayed group, the difference being statistically significant (P < 0.001 for visits, and P < 0.001 for surgical interventions). Conclusions: Preliminary 1 year follow-up data suggest that immediate placement of 6.0 to 8.0 mm wide diameter implants in molar extraction sockets yielded inferior aesthetic outcomes than ridge preservation and delayed placement of conventional 4.0 to 5.0 mm diameter implants. Conflict of interest statement: This trial was partially funded by the manufacturer of the implants evaluated in his investigation (MegaGen Implant Co, Gyeongbuk, South Korea). However, data belonged to the authors and in no way did the manufacturer interfere with the conduct of the trial or the publication of its results. © Quintessenz.
45.	D'Avenia, F., et al. (author) THE IMPACT OF REPEATED ABUTMENT CHANGES ON PERI-IMPLANT TISSUE STABILITY: FIVE-YEAR POST-LOADING RESULTS FROM A MULTICENTRE RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL 2020 In: Clinical Trials in Dentistry. ; 02:01, s. 27-46 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
46.	Davó, Rubén, et al. (author) Immediately loaded zygomatic implants vs conventional dental implants in augmented atrophic maxillae: 1-year post-loading results from a multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2018 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 11:2, s. 145-161 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To compare the clinical outcome of immediately loaded cross-arch maxillary prostheses supported by zygomatic implants vs conventional implants placed in augmented bone.In total, 71 edentulous patients with severely atrophic maxillas without sufficient bone volumes for placing dental implants, or when it was possible to place only two implants in the anterior area (minimal diameter 3.5 mm and length of 8 mm) and less than 4 mm of bone height subantrally, were randomised according to a parallel group design to receive zygomatic implants (35 patients) to be loaded immediately vs grafting with a xenograft, followed after 6 months of graft consolidation by placement of six to eight conventional dental implants submerged for 4 months (36 patients). For immediate loading, zygomatic implants had to be inserted with an insertion torque superior to 40 Ncm. Screw-retained metal reinforced acrylic provisional prostheses were provided, to be replaced by definitive Procera Implant Bridge Titanium prostheses (Nobel Biocare, Göteborg, Sweden), with ceramic or acrylic veneer materials 4 months after initial loading. Outcome measures were: prosthesis, implant and augmentation failures, any complications, quality of life (OHIP-14), patients' number of days with total or partial impaired activity, time to function and number of dental visits, assessed by independent assessors. Patients were followed up to 1 year after loading.No augmentation procedure failed. Five patients dropped out from the augmentation group. Six prostheses could not be delivered or failed in the augmentation group vs one prosthesis in the zygomatic group, the difference being statistically significant (difference in proportions = -16.5%; P = 0.045; 95% CI: -0.34 to -0.01). Eight patients lost 35 implants in the augmentation group vs two patients who lost four zygomatic implants, the difference being statistically significant (difference in proportions = -20.1%; P = 0.037; 95% CI: -0.38 to -0.02). A total of 14 augmented patients were affected by 22 complications, vs 28 zygomatic patients (40 complications), the difference being statistically significant (difference in proportions = 34.8%; P = 0.005; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.54). The 1-year OHIP-14 score was 3.93 ± 5.86 for augmented patients and 3.97 ± 4.32 for zygomatic patients with no statistically significant differences between groups (mean difference = 0.04; 95% CI: -2.56 to 2.65; P = 0.747). Both groups had significantly improved OHIP-14 scores from before rehabilitation (P < 0.001 for both augmented and zygomatic patients). On average, the number of days of total infirmity was 7.42 ± 3.17 for the augmented group and 7.17 ± 1.96 for the zygomatic group, the difference not being statistically significant (mean difference = -0.25; 95% CI: -1.52 to 1.02; P = 0.692). The number of days of partial infirmity were on average 14.24 ± 4.64 for the augmented group and 12.17 ± 3.82 for the zygomatic group, the difference being statistically significant (mean difference = -2.07; 95% CI: -4.12 to -0.02; P = 0.048). The mean number of days that needed to have a functional prosthesis was 444.32 ± 207.86 for augmented patients and 1.34 ± 2.27 for zygomatic patients, the difference being statistically significant (mean difference = -442.98; 95% CI: -513.10 to -372.86; P < 0.001). The average number of dental visits was 19.72 ± 12.22 for augmented patients and 15.12 ± 5.76 for zygomatic patients, the difference not being statistically significant (mean difference = -4.61; 95% CI: -9.31 to 0.92; P = 0.055).Preliminary 1-year post-loading data suggest that immediately loaded zygomatic implants were associated with statistically significantly fewer prosthetic failures (one vs six patients), implant failures (two vs eight patients) and time needed to functional loading (1.3 days vs 444.3 days) when compared to augmentation procedures and conventionally loaded dental implants. Even if more complications were reported for zygomatic implants, they proved to be a better rehabilitation modality for severely atrophic maxillae. Long-term data are absolutely needed to confirm or dispute these preliminary results.
47.	De Angelis, Nicola, et al. (author) Guided bone regeneration with and without a bone substitute at single post-extractive implants: 1-year post-loading results from a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2011 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 4:4, s. 313-25 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To evaluate whether the adjunctive use of a bone substitute at immediate single implants placed in fresh extraction sockets with a residual buccal bone-to-implant gap of at least 1 mm could improve the aesthetic outcome of guided bone regeneration (GBR).Eighty patients requiring bone augmentation at a single immediate postextractive implant to improve the aesthetic outcome were randomly allocated to an augmentation procedure using a resorbable barrier alone (GBR group; 40 patients) or a bone substitute plus a resorbable barrier (GBR + BS group; 40 patients) according to a parallel group design at four different centres. Three to 4 months after implant placement/augmentation, implants were loaded with provisional or definitive single crowns. Outcome measures were implant failures, complications, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES), patient satisfaction and peri-implant marginal bone levels, recorded by blinded assessors. All patients were followed up to 1 year after loading.One patient dropped out from the GBR group. Seven (9%) implants failed: 2 (5%) in the GBR + BS group and 5 (12.5%) in the GBR group. Six minor complications occurred in the GBR + BS group versus 2 in the GBR group. These differences were not statistically significant. Just after implant placement/augmentation, mean bone levels were -0.21 mm at GBR + BS implants and -1.92 mm at GBR implants whereas at 1 year after loading they were -1.04 and -1.76, respectively. When comparing the two groups, GBR + BS implants had 0.70 mm more peri-implant marginal bone than GBR implants. Aesthetics was scored by a blinded assessor as statistically significantly better for the GBR + BS group. Patients were equally satisfied. There were no differences between centres regarding the clinical outcomes.The use of additional an organic bovine bone substitute (Endobon) with resorbable collagen barriers (OsseoGuard) in defects around post-extractive implant improves the aesthetic outcome, though single post-extractive implants might be at a higher risk for implant failures.
48.	Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al. (author) A 3-year post-loading report of a randomised controlled trial on the rehabilitation of posterior atrophic mandibles: short implants or longer implants in vertically augmented bone? 2011 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 4:4, s. 301-11 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract Objectives: To evaluate whether 6.3 mm-long implants could be a suitable alternative to longer implants placed in vertically augmented atrophic posterior mandibles. Materials and methods: Sixty partially edentulous patients having 7 to 8 mm of residual crestal height and at least 5.5 mm thickness measured on CT scans above the mandibular canal were randomised according to a parallel group design either to receive 1 to 3 submerged 6.3 mm-long implants or 9.3 mm or longer implants (30 patients per group) placed in vertically augmented bone. Bone was augmented with interpositional anorganic bovine bone blocks covered by resorbable barriers. Grafts were left to heal for 5 months before implant placement. Four months later, provisional acrylic prostheses were delivered, and were then replaced after another 4 months by definitive metal-ceramic prostheses. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, complications, and radiographic peri-implant marginal bone level changes. All patients were followed up to 3 years after loading. Results: Four patients dropped out, two from each group. The augmentation procedure failed in two patients and only 6.3 mm-long implants could be inserted. There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis and implant failures. Three prostheses could not be placed or had to be remade in the short implant group versus 4 prostheses in the augmented group. Two short implants failed versus 3 long implants, all in different patients. There were statistically significantly more complications in augmented patients (22 complications in 20 augmented patients versus 5 complications in 5 patients of the short implant group). Both groups gradually lost peri-implant bone in a statistically significant way at 4 months, and 1 and 3 years after loading. Three years after loading, patients of the short implant group lost an average of 1.24 mm of peri-implant bone compared with 1.76 mm in the long implant group. Short implants experienced statistically significantly less bone loss (0.52 mm; CI 95% 0.20 to 0.83, P = 0.002) than long implants. Conclusions: When residual bone height over the mandibular canal is between 7 and 8 mm, 6.3 mm short implants could be an interesting alternative to vertical augmentation since the treatment is faster, cheaper and associated with less morbidity. Longer follow-ups are needed to confirm these results.
49.	Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al. (author) A 5-year follow-up comparative analysis of the efficacy of various osseointegrated dental implant systems. A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials. 2005 In: The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 2005. ; 20 (4):4, s. 557-568 Journal article (peer-reviewed)
50.	Esposito, Marco, 1965, et al. (author) A comparison of two dental implant systems in partially edentulous patients: 4-month post-loading results from a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial. 2013 In: European journal of oral implantology. - 1756-2406. ; 6:2, s. 169-79 Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract To compare the clinical effectiveness of two implant systems: Way Milano and Kentron (Geass, Pozzuolo del Friuli, UD, Italy).

Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka

Permalink

Result 1-50 of 207

Refine your search

Type of publication: journal article (182); conference paper (14); research review (7); book chapter (3); review (1)

Type of content: peer-reviewed (188); other academic/artistic (19)

Author/Editor: Esposito, Marco, 196 ... (207); Felice, P. (40); Felice, Pietro (38); Pistilli, R. (27); Barausse, C. (25); Buti, J. (21); show more...; Pistilli, Roberto (20); Thomsen, Peter, 1953 (19); Barausse, Carlo (18); Cannizzaro, Gioacchi ... (16); Trullenque-Eriksson, ... (15); Cannizzaro, G. (13); Grusovin, Maria Gabr ... (13); Ippolito, Daniela Ri ... (11); Sbricoli, L. (10); Leone, M (9); Buti, Jacopo (9); Ferri, V. (9); Trullenque-Eriksson, ... (9); Coulthard, P (9); Worthington, Helen V ... (8); Leone, Michele (8); Soardi, Elisa (8); Piattelli, M. (8); Grusovin, M.G. (8); Worthington, H. V. (8); Pellegrino, Gerardo (7); Coulthard, Paul (6); Gretzer, Christina, ... (6); Suska, Felicia, 1974 (6); Ferri, Vittorio (6); Checchi, L (6); Viola, P. (5); Ippolito, D.R (5); Lazzarini, M. (5); Grandi, G. (5); Nieri, Michele (5); Maghaireh, H. (5); Gualini, F. (5); Tengvall, Pentti (4); Emanuelsson, Lena, 1 ... (4); Testori, Tiziano (4); Sbricoli, Luca (4); Lazzarini, Matteo (4); Gastaldi, Giorgio (4); Galli, Fabio (4); Zucchelli, G. (4); Luongo, G. (4); Mohammadi, Sham, 196 ... (4); Soardi, E. (4); show less...

University: University of Gothenburg (207); Linköping University (3); Kristianstad University College (1); Malmö University (1); RISE (1); Karolinska Institutet (1)

Language: English (205); German (2)

Research subject (UKÄ/SCB): Medical and Health Sciences (207)

Year

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

LIBRIS.kb.se

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view