Success Criteria in Implant Dentistry

Papaspyridakos, Panos; Chen, C.-J.; Singh, Mukti; Weber, Hans‐Peter; Gallucci, German O.

doi:10.1177/0022034511431252

Cited by 515 publications

(448 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

401

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In dental implant treatment, rapid and reliable osseointegration is the key to success [4,5], and the adhesion of epithelial cells over mesenchymal stem cells prohibits osseointegration [9,10,14,15]. Therefore, controlling the respective populations of epithelial and mesenchymal stem cells to shift the balance in favor of mesenchymal stem cells could help to ensure osseointegration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Migration and Osteogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Titanium with a Micro-Patterned Gelatin Matrix

Kawai¹,

Nagaoka²,

Inubushi³

et al. 2017

IJTAN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Migration and Osteogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Titanium with a Micro-Patterned Gelatin Matrix

Kawai¹,

Nagaoka²,

Inubushi³

et al. 2017

IJTAN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since introduction of platform switching (PS) concept, there are many fi nite-element and in vivo studies on its eff ect on the MBL were conducted. [1][2][3][4][5] However, most studies that aiming on the eff ect of PS on MBL compared to platform matching (PM) implant-abutment have relatively short follow-up periods and diff erent sample sizes in addition to heterogeneity and possible publication bias, which led to diff erent conclusions even in systematic reviews, ranging from not revealing any clinical superiority for any particular implant design in maintaining marginal bone levels to recognizing the PS technique as appearing useful in limiting bone resorption. So that long term, well-conducted RCT to validate eff ect of PS is conceded even in most recently publishing review.…”

Section: Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Value of platform switching on marginal peri-implant bone loss reduction : A summary review

Al-Fahd¹

2015

IDJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Question:Is there an impact of platform switching (PS) on marginal bone level changes MBL around endosseous implants compared to implants with platform-matching (PM) implant-abutment confi gurations? Data Sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Journals at Ovid Full Text and Embase published between 2005 and June 2013. Besides manual search in the peer reviewed Germanlanguage Journal of Oral Implantology (Zeitschrift fur zahnarztliche Implantologie) or Implantologie (for both journals RCTs and PCCS were included). Study Selection: Articles that published between 2005 and 2013 that reporting comparison of MBL changes at implants with PS or PM implant-abutment confi gurations as primary outcome were selected from electronic databases with language restriction was for English or German. RCTs with a follow-up period of at least 12 months were included in the meta-analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted by 2 reviewers independently with high agreement between them. A search strategy was conducted using the MeSH and search term combinations, considering the PICO format. Th e quality assessment of RCTs is performed following the recommendations by Higgins and Green (2011). Th e diff erence of the assessment results was low, resulting in a κ score of 0.923 (disagreement in four of 105 fi elds) between the reviewers. Consent was reached by discussion. Results: Regarding PCCS the total articles were 7 that were interpretate separately because of lacking of random allocation that revealing 3 studies with no signifi cance between two group whereas 3 studies reveal signifi cance diff erence between two group preferring PS (less MBL) and one study reveal a remarkable mean MBL in the PM group compared to the PS group. Whereas searching for RCTS resulting in a total of 13 that are eligible for inclusion into a meta-analysis that comprised a total of 549 patients receiving 1035 implants. Because of signifi cant degree of heterogeneity (I 2 = 96.2%) P < 0.0001 the treatment eff ects were assumed to be not homogeneous among the studies, and a random eff ects model for combining eff ects of all studies was applied. Th e meta-analysis result was reveal a signifi cantly less mean MBL change (0.49 mm CI95% [0.38; 0.60]) at PS implants compared to PM implants (1.01 mm (CI95% 0.62; 1.40) [P < 0.0001]) on an implantbased analysis. Funnel-plot calculation showed no asymmetry (P = 0.733), and therefore, no publication bias. Conclusion: Only two studies with a low risk of bias. All other studies revealed a tendency of a high risk of bias, resulting in an overall unclear and high risk of bias across studies. So, the author recommend for further research to overcome all these previous limitations and for providing more evidence research on the eff ect of PS on MBL.

show abstract

“…Sin embargo, existen diversas acuerdos consensuales y revisiones que proponen ciertas condiciones que determinarían la sobrevivencia o éxito de un implante dental. 14 Misch et al 12 publican un artículo a partir de la conferencia de consenso del Congreso Internacional de Implantólogos Orales en Pisa en el que se acuerdan determinados parámetros para determinar el éxito, sobrevivencia y fracaso de implantes. Se considera que dentro de la categoría de sobrevivencia de implantes, se debe incluir dos tipos de sobrevivencia.…”

Section: Periodontitisunclassified

“…Una revisión sistemática reciente presentada por Papaspyridakos et al 14 encontraron que los cuatro parámetros más utilizados en la literatura científica para determinar el éxito de un implante son: nivel óseo alrededor del implante, tejidos blandos peri-implantarios, condición de la prótesis y evaluación subjetiva del paciente. Los autores concluyen que el éxito final de un implante debe ser evaluado en un período largo de seguimiento que considera el complejo implantoprotésico como una entidad total.…”

Section: Periodontitisunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Factores de riesgo y periimplantitis en la terapia implantológica. Revisión narrativa.

Bravo¹,

Castro²,

Grados³

2013

Joralres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

REVIEWFactores de riesgo y periimplantitis en la terapia implantológica. Revisión narrativa.Bravo F, Castro Y & Grados S. Factores de riesgo y periimplantitis en la terapia implantológica. Revisión narrativa. J Oral Res 2013; 2(3): 139-144.Resumen: Las enfermedades que involucran a los tejidos que rodean a los dientes y a los implantes osteointegrados son el resultado de una interacción entre algún tipo de agente patológico (bacteriano, viral, etc.) y la respuesta inmunitaria del huésped. Estas interacciones se pueden dar tanto en los tejidos dentarios como en aquellos biomateriales que se introducen para tratar de corregir algún tipo de patología periodontal; los implantes al ser sustitutos biocompatibles de las piezas dentarias no están exentas de este tipo de interacciones que muchas veces cursan con patologías periodontales y periimplantarias. La periimplantitis es un tipo de patología que resulta de dicha interacción; los factores de riesgo e indicadores de riesgo de la periimplantitis son amplios y complejos. El presente artículo resume las múltiples fuentes de información de la literatura científica para abordar al detalle los aspectos de los principales factores de riesgo y la periimplantitis en la terapia implantológica.. Palabras clave: Implantes dentales, mucosa periimplantaria, periodontitis crónica, factores de riesgo.Risk factors and periimplantitis in implant therapy. Narrative review.Abstract: Diseases involving tissue around the teeth and osseointegrated implants are the result of an interaction between some type of pathological agent (bacterial, viral, etc.) and host immune response. These interactions can occur both in the dental tissues as those biomaterials which are introduced to attempt to correct some type of periodontal disease, the implant being a biocompatible substitute of the teeth is not free from this type of interaction often enrolled periodontal and peri-implant pathology. The peri-implantitis is a type of disease that results from this interaction, the risk factors and risk indicators of peri-implantitis are broad and complex. This article summarizes the multiple sources of information in the scientific literature to address in detail the aspects of the main risk factors and the peri-implantitis in the peri implant therapy.

show abstract

Success Criteria in Implant Dentistry

Cited by 515 publications

References 35 publications

Migration and Osteogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Titanium with a Micro-Patterned Gelatin Matrix

Migration and Osteogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Titanium with a Micro-Patterned Gelatin Matrix

Value of platform switching on marginal peri-implant bone loss reduction : A summary review

Factores de riesgo y periimplantitis en la terapia implantológica. Revisión narrativa.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About