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
The management of marked horizontal bone atrophy represents a critical challenge for traditional implantology procedures. For this purpose, clinicians have developed several protocols and procedures to allow the most suitable and accurate surgical and prosthetic implant rehabilitation. Despite the development of guided bone regeneration methods and the use of small-diameter implants, the rehabilitation of thin bone areas is a clinical dilemma for the medium- and long-term survival of implant-prosthetic therapies. This clinical case evaluates the use of wedge-shaped implants for the full-arch rehabilitation of an atrophic maxilla with a thin ridge. This treatment choice allowed a minimally invasive rehabilitation, avoiding regenerative bone surgery, while respecting biologic and prosthetic limits. Furthermore, evaluation of the implant stability quotient and marginal bone loss values during the first year of follow-up allowed analysis of the behavior of this rehabilitation in fullarch maxillary cases.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/prd.6453 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!