4.5 Article

Resonance frequency analysis of implants subjected to immediate or early functional occlusal loading -: Successful vs. failing implants

期刊

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
卷 15, 期 4, 页码 428-434

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01036.x

关键词

clinical study; dental implants; immediate loading; implant stability; resonance frequency analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The objective of this study was to analyze the development of implant stability by repeated resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements during 1 year in 23 patients treated according to an immediate/early-loading protocol. The objective was also to evaluate the possible differences between failing and successful implants. Material and methods: Eighty-one Branemark System implants were placed in 23 patients for immediate/early-occlusal loading in all jaw regions. Thirty of the implants were placed in extraction sockets and 62 were subjected to GBR procedures. Apart from clinical and radiographic examinations, the patients were followed with RFA at placement, prosthesis connection and after 1-3, 6 and 12 months. Statistical analyses were carried out to study the possible differences between implants that failed during the study period and implants that remained successful. Results: Nine implants failed (11.2%) during the 1 year of loading. RFA showed a distinct different pattern between the implants that remained stable and the implants that were lost. The implants that failed during the course of the study showed a significantly lower stability already after 1 month. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it is concluded that failing implants show a continuous decrease of stability until failure. Low RFA levels after 1 and 2 months seem to indicate an increased risk for future failure. This information may be used to avoid implant failure in the future by unloading implants with decreasing degree of stability with time as diagnosed with the RFA technique.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据