A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of NobelActive(TM) dental implants. | LitMetric

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of NobelActive(TM) dental implants.

Clin Oral Implants Res

Discipline of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Published: March 2013

Objectives: To conduct a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the short-term clinical and radiographic efficacy of the NobelActive™ system and to evaluate the relative importance of achieving primary stability at placement.

Materials And Methods: A total of 32 subjects were recruited and, using a split-mouth design, the NobelActive(TM) implant was compared with a contralaterally matched Brånemark implant. Both implants were placed in a single surgical procedure into healed sites using a one-stage protocol and reviewed at monthly intervals. NobelActive(TM) implants were functionally loaded with provisional restorations at 1 month and all implants were restored with final crowns 3 months post-implant placement. The implant was assessed using peak insertion torque values, resonance frequency analysis (RFA), clinical parameters, digital subtraction radiography, and cone beam computed tomography.

Results: The insertion torque was significantly greater for the NobelActive(TM) implant group (P = 0.02), although no observable difference in RFA values were found. Preliminary results of 6 months follow-up suggest comparable clinical and radiographic healing responses between the test and control implants. Within the limits of the sample population, the survival rates were lower with the test implants, although this difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: The NobelActive(TM) implant system requires higher insertion torques and can also achieve greater primary stability compared with a control implant system. Short-term survival and marginal bone levels of NobelActive(TM) and control implants are comparable, although the NobelActive(TM) implant system appeared to be more technique-sensitive.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02313.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

nobelactivetm implant
16
clinical radiographic
12
implant system
12
primary stability
8
insertion torque
8
control implants
8
nobelactivetm
7
implants
7
implant
7
clinical
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!