liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Tooth-implant supported fixed prostheses: A retrospective multicenter study
Umea Univ, Fac Med & Odontol, Dept Prosthodont, S-90187 Umea, Sweden Specialist Ctr Oral Rehabil, Dept Prosthodont, Linkoping, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Lycksele, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Dept Prosthodont, Lulea, Sweden.
Umea Univ, Fac Med & Odontol, Dept Prosthodont, S-90187 Umea, Sweden Specialist Ctr Oral Rehabil, Dept Prosthodont, Linkoping, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Lycksele, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Dept Prosthodont, Lulea, Sweden.
Umea Univ, Fac Med & Odontol, Dept Prosthodont, S-90187 Umea, Sweden Specialist Ctr Oral Rehabil, Dept Prosthodont, Linkoping, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Lycksele, Sweden Natl Dent Serv, Dept Prosthodont, Lulea, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2001 (English)In: International Journal of Prosthodontics, ISSN 0893-2174, E-ISSN 1139-9791, Vol. 14, no 4, 321-328 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective multicenter study on implants combined with natural teeth was to investigate the implant survival rate and loss of marginal bone, as well as indications and complications pertinent to this form of implant therapy. Materials and Methods: The study comprised 185 implants in 111 patients from six different clinics in Sweden. Gathering of data, which were taken from patient records, followed a strict protocol. The registrations included indications for treatment, failure of implants, radiographs from baseline and follow-up, and information on complications. Results: The cumulative implant survival was found to be 95.4% (standard error 4.5%) up to 3 years of follow-up. The marginal bone level at baseline was lower in the maxilla compared with the mandible (P = .015), but any further loss did not differ between the jaws. The most severe complication other than loss of osseointegration (6/185) or periimplant infections (4/183) was intrusion of the abutment teeth, which occurred in 5% of the cases. In all instances, the intrusion was seen in constructions with nonrigid forms of connection between the implants and teeth. Conclusion: The tooth-implant supported prosthesis using the Branemark system is in the short term an equally predictable treatment as the completely implant-supported prosthesis concerning implant survival and loss of marginal bone. When combining implants and teeth, a rigid form of connection should be used to prevent tooth intrusion.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2001. Vol. 14, no 4, 321-328 p.
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-49202OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-49202DiVA: diva2:270098
Available from: 2009-10-11 Created: 2009-10-11 Last updated: 2017-12-12

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

In the same journal
International Journal of Prosthodontics
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 23 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf