| Lin S.F. |
------>authors3_c=None ------>paper_class1=2 ------>Impact_Factor=None ------>paper_class3=0 ------>paper_class2=0 ------>vol= ------>confirm_bywho=seanlee ------>insert_bywho=lcpan ------>Jurnal_Rank=None ------>authors4_c=None ------>comm_author= ------>patent_EDate=None ------>authors5_c=None ------>publish_day=None ------>paper_class2Letter=None ------>page2= ------>medlineContent= ------>unit=F0200 ------>insert_date=20040507 ------>iam=2 ------>update_date=None ------>author=??? ------>change_event=5 ------>ISSN=None ------>authors_c=None ------>score=-75 ------>journal_name=The 23th International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology ------>paper_name=Resonance Frequency Analysis for Osseointegration in four Surgical Conditions of Dental Implants ------>confirm_date=20040507 ------>tch_id=087005 ------>pmid=16796282 ------>page1= ------>fullAbstract=PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to describe experiences of 11 consecutively treated patients who received zygomatic implants. Patient results were assessed through clinical and radiographic evaluations of tissue conditions, including resonance frequency analysis (RFA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven patients were treated with implant-retained fixed prostheses. A total of 64 implants were placed, 22 of which were placed in the zygoma. Fixed prostheses were removed to allow clinical and radiographic evaluations at a follow-up visit 18 to 46 months following implant placement. RFA was performed on all implants. A visual analog scale was used to assess patient satisfaction before and after treatment. RESULTS: All patients received implant-supported prostheses. All zygomatic implants demonstrated clinical signs of osseointegration. One anterior implant was lost during follow-up. Mean ISQ values for the zygomatic and anterior implants were 65.9 (range, 42 to 100) and 61.5 (range, 48 to 71), respectively. Twenty-four implants showed moderate inflammation, with 3 exhibiting severe inflammation. Most anterior implants (75.6%) showed a marginal bone recession of 1 thread or less. Four zygomatic implants showed bone loss of 4 to 5 threads, and 5 zygomatic implants exhibited no marginal bone support. Patients described significant improvement in chewing ability and esthetics but did not describe changes in speech. DISCUSSION: The use of zygomatic implants can help the clinician avoid the need for bone grafting and reduce morbidity. In addition, it can shorten the treatment time considerably. CONCLUSION: This preliminary report demonstrates that zygomatic implants can provide posterior support to fixed prostheses in patients who lack bone volume to place conventional implants without encroaching upon the maxillary sinus. ------>tmu_sno=None ------>sno=9303 ------>authors2=Pan L.C. ------>authors3=Lee S.Y. ------>authors4=Peng Y.H. ------>authors5= ------>authors6= ------>authors6_c=None ------>authors=Lin S.F. ------>delete_flag=0 ------>SCI_JNo=None ------>authors2_c=None ------>publish_area=None ------>updateTitle=Rehabilitation of severely resorbed maxillae with zygomatic implants: an evaluation of implant stability, tissue conditions, and patients~ opinion before and after treatment. ------>language=2 ------>check_flag=None ------>submit_date=None ------>country=None ------>no= ------>patent_SDate=None ------>update_bywho=None ------>publish_year=2001 ------>submit_flag=None ------>publish_month=None |