Publications by authors named "Eugenia Candel-Marti"
Article Synopsis
- The study compares patient satisfaction and quality of life between two groups of individuals receiving full-arch fixed prostheses: those with palatal positioned implants (test group) and those with well-centered implants (control group).
- Although the test group reported higher satisfaction in most areas and lower incidence of problems, these findings were not statistically significant.
- The conclusion indicates that the design used for palatal implants does not negatively affect patient satisfaction or quality of life when compared to conventional implant placements, despite the study's retrospective nature and limitations.
Palatal positioned implants in severely atrophic maxillae versus conventional implants to support fixed full-arch prostheses: Controlled retrospective study with 5 years of follow-up.
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal
May 2015
Background: To evaluate soft tissue conditions and bone loss around palatal positioned implants supporting fixed full-arch prostheses to rehabilitate edentulous maxillae with horizontal atrophy and compare them with conventional well-centered implants placed in non-atrophic maxillae after a minimum follow-up of 5 years.
Material And Methods: A clinical retrospective study was performed of patients that were rehabilitated with full-arch fixed implant-supported maxillary prostheses and had a minimum follow-up of 5 years after implant loading. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients with class IV maxilla according to Cawood and Howell and treated with palatal positioned implants (test) and with class III maxilla and treated with implants well-centered in the alveolar ridge and completely surrounded by bone (control).
Purpose: To evaluate the 5-year outcome of a previously reported case series of patients with severely atrophic maxillae treated with palatally positioned implants and fixed full-arch rehabilitations.
Materials And Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional clinical study of patients treated between January 2000 and January 2004 with palatally positioned implants was carried out. The parameters evaluated at the 5-year follow-up visit were: implant success rate, peri-implant soft-tissue conditions, biological and prosthetic post-loading complications, radiographic peri-implant marginal bone loss, and patient satisfaction.
Oral rehabilitation with tilted dental implants: a metaanalysis.
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal
July 2012
Objective: To compare the course of patients treated with tilted implants versus those treated conventionally with axial implants, analyzing the success rate and marginal bone loss.
Material And Methods: A PubMed search was made using the key words "tilted implants ", "angled implants ", "angulated implants ", "inclined implants " and "maxillary atrophy. " A review was made of the articles published between 1999-2010.
Article Synopsis
- The review examines studies on tilted implants for patients with maxillary atrophy, focusing on clinical outcomes from 1999 to 2010.
- The analysis includes 13 studies with a total of 1,448 implants, revealing success rates of 91.3% to 100% for both tilted and axial implants, with minimal differences in bone loss and few complications reported.
- The findings suggest that tilted implants have high success rates, low complications, and high patient satisfaction, but call for further research due to study inconsistencies and short follow-up durations.
The objective of this study was to review the published literature to evaluate treatment success with zygomatic implants in patients with atrophic posterior maxilla. Studies from 1987 to 2010 were reviewed. In each study, the following were assessed: indications for treatment, number of patients, number of implants, length and diameter of the implants, surgical technique, prosthetic rehabilitation, success rate, complications, and patient satisfaction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF