Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

Cemented ceraone® and por… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Webbkarta
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Cemented ceraone® and porcelain fused to tiadapt ™ abutment single-implant crown restorations: A 10-year comparative follow-up study

Artikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift
Författare Torsten Jemt
Publicerad i Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research
Volym 11
Nummer/häfte 4
Sidor 303-310
ISSN 1523-0899
Publiceringsår 2009
Publicerad vid Institutionen för odontologi
Sidor 303-310
Språk en
Länkar dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008...
Ämnesord Abutment singel-implant crown, porcelain fused, TiAdapttrade mark, cemented CeraOne(R), 10-year comparative follow-up study
Ämneskategorier Oral protetik

Sammanfattning

Background: Long-term data comparing cemented and noncemented single-implant restorations has not been reported. Aim: To compare clinical and radiographic performance of single-implant crown restorations made by either directly baked porcelain to custom-made TiAdapttrade mark titanium abutments (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden) (test) or cement crowns onto CeraOne(R) (Nobel Biocare AB) abutments (control) after 10 years in function. Materials and Methods: Altogether, 35 consecutive patients were provided with 41 turned single Brånemark System(R) implants (Nobel Biocare AB) in the partially edentulous upper jaw. By random, 15 and 20 patients were provided with 18 test and 23 control implant crowns, respectively. Thereafter, clinical and radiographic data were collected and compared between the two groups. Results: None of the implants were found loose during the follow-up period (100%). Few clinical problems were observed, and the overall average marginal bone loss was 0.26 mm (SD 0.64) during 10 years in function. After the final tightening of the crowns, no significant differences were observed between the test and control groups (p > .05). The head of the implants was placed on an average 6.3 mm (SD 2.24) below the cement/enamel junction of the adjacent teeth (range 2.5-10.0 mm). Implants with reported mechanical and/or mucosal problems or placed more apically in relation to the adjacent teeth did not present more bone loss as compared with implants with no problems or placed more coronally, respectively (p > .05). Conclusions: There seems to be no obvious clinical or radiographic differences between the test and control single-implant restorations during 10 years of follow-up. Occasionally, some restorations presented loose abutment screws and/or fistulas during follow-up. This implies a certain need for maintenance where a one-piece single-implant protocol (test) allows both for a simple clinical procedure at placement without cementation problems, as well as for an easy and simple maintenance of installed single implant crowns in long-term function.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11
Dela:

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?