In April 2016 Manchester eScholar was replaced by the University of Manchester’s new Research Information Management System, Pure. In the autumn the University’s research outputs will be available to search and browse via a new Research Portal. Until then the University’s full publication record can be accessed via a temporary portal and the old eScholar content is available to search and browse via this archive.

Related resources

Full-text held externally

University researcher(s)

A retrospective cohort study of 113 patients rehabilitated with immediately loaded maxillary cross-arch fixed dental prostheses in combination with immediate implant placement.

Gillot, Luc; Cannas, Bernard; Buti, Jacopo; Noharet, Renaud

European journal of oral implantology. 2012;5(1):71-9.

Access to files

Full-text and supplementary files are not available from Manchester eScholar. Full-text is available externally using the following links:

Full-text held externally

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the outcome of immediately loaded cross-arch fixed dental prostheses 6 months after loading. A second aim was to compare survival rates of implants placed in healed versus fresh extraction sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 113 consecutive patients about to have their maxillae rendered fully edentulous (mean extractions per patient: 6.7 teeth) received four to eight implants each (total number = 675) which were immediately placed in healed sites (323 implants, 47.9%) or fresh sockets (352 implants, 52.1%). Immediate loading of provisional prostheses was performed and all patients were followed up for 6 months. The success criteria included prosthesis success, assessment of individual implant stability and complications. RESULTS: No patients dropped out and all 113 patients received definitive fixed prostheses after 6 months of loading. The overall implant survival rate after 6 months was 99.1%. Six implants were lost in 6 patients (5.3%). Five of them were inserted in fresh extraction sockets (1.4%) and one in a healed site (0.3%). No significant difference (P = 0.1621) was found for implants placed in healed sites versus fresh extraction sites. Ten patients had fractures of the provisional prostheses as complications. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implant placement and loading resulted in high implant as well as prosthetic survival rates. Placement in healed or fresh extraction bone sites may not influence implant survival.

Bibliographic metadata

Type of resource:
Content type:
Publication type:
Published date:
Abbreviated journal title:
ISSN:
Place of publication:
England
Volume:
5
Issue:
1
Pagination:
71-9
Pubmed Identifier:
22518381
Pii Identifier:
23446
Access state:
Active

Institutional metadata

University researcher(s):

Record metadata

Manchester eScholar ID:
uk-ac-man-scw:205268
Created by:
Buti, Jacopo
Created:
19th August, 2013, 09:57:31
Last modified by:
Buti, Jacopo
Last modified:
19th August, 2013, 09:57:31

Can we help?

The library chat service will be available from 11am-3pm Monday to Friday (excluding Bank Holidays). You can also email your enquiry to us.