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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

[Comparison of soft and hard tissue stability between immediate implant and delayed implant in maxillary anterior region after loading 2 years]. | LitMetric

Objective: To compare the peri-implant tissue stability between immediate implant and delayed implant in maxillary anterior region after loading 2 years.

Methods: In the study, 38 patients with single anterior tooth loss in the Second Clinical Division of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology from October 2010 to December 2011 were enrolled, and 43 implants were inserted. The gingival contour was induced using implant-supported temporary crowns prior to restoration till permanent prostheses delivered. The gingival papilla height, labial gingival margin level and peri-implant bone level were measured immediately after the permanent restoration and 2 years later.

Results: In the study, 16 patients were treated by immediate implant for 17 implants; 22 patients were treated by delayed implant for 26 implants. The implant stability quotient (ISQ) value of the 2 groups showed no significant difference before permanent restoration (P>0.05). In all the cases after loading 2 years, the average mesial gingival papilla height in the implant area of the immediate group and delayed group increased by (0.15 ± 0.42) mm and (0.06 ± 0.65) mm, respectively; the distal gingival papilla height increased by (0.06 ± 0.50) mm and (0.02 ± 0.57) mm respectively; while the labial gingival margin level shrinkages were (0.15 ± 0.23) mm and (0.15 ± 0.46) mm, respectively. The peri-implant bone losses in the mesial side were (0.67 ± 0.35) mm and (0.6 9 ± 0.49) mm, respectively, while in the distal side were (0.73 ± 0.31) mm and (0.75 ± 0.48) mm, respectively. All these indicators showed no significant difference between the 2 groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion: Both the cases obtained optimizer results after loading 2 years, and the soft and hard tissues around the implant were very stable, which means that both the protocols can achieve reliable therapeutic effects. If we can handle the indications, immediate implant for anterior teeth shows similar efficacy with delayed implant in the short term. But immediate implant in terms of shortening the course of treatment is clearly superior to delayed implant.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

delayed implant
20
implant
13
gingival papilla
12
papilla height
12
soft hard
8
tissue stability
8
stability implant
8
implant delayed
8
implant maxillary
8
maxillary anterior
8

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!