Publications

Detailed Information

Retrospective clinical study of ultrawide implants more than 6 mm in diameter

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorKu, Jeong Kui-
dc.contributor.authorYi, Yang Jin-
dc.contributor.authorYun, Pil Young-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Young Kyun-
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-01T01:33:05Z-
dc.date.available2024-05-01T01:33:05Z-
dc.date.created2018-10-10-
dc.date.issued2016-08-
dc.identifier.citationMaxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol.38 No.1, pp.1-6-
dc.identifier.issn2288-8101-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/200140-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The prognosis of wide implants tends to be controversial. While wider implants were initially expected to result in a larger osseointegration area and have higher levels of primary stability, they were reported to have a relatively high rate of failure. The clinical outcome of ultrawide implants of more than 6 mm in diameter was evaluated through a retrospective study. Methods: The investigation was conducted on patients who had received ultrawide implant (≥6 mm diameter) placements in Seoul National University Bundang Hospital from January 2008 to December 2013. Complications were investigated during the maintenance period, and marginal bone loss was measured using periapical radiography. Primary stability immediately after the implant placement and second stability after second surgery or during impression were measured using Osstell® Mentor (Osstell, Sweden) as an implant stability quotient (ISQ). Results: Fifty-eight implants were placed in 53 patients (30 male, 23 female), and they were observed for an average of 50.06 ± 23.49 months. The average ISQ value increased from 71.22 ± 10.26 to 77.48 ± 8.98 (P < 0.005). The primary and secondary stability shows significantly higher at the mandible than at the maxilla (P < 0.001). However, mean survival rate shows 98.28 %. Average marginal bone loss of 0.018 and 0.045 mm were measured at 12 and 24 months after the loading and 0.14 mm at final follow-up date (mean 46.25 months), respectively. Also in this study, the bone loss amount was noticeably small compared to regular implants reported in previous studies. Conclusions: The excellent clinical outcome of ultrawide implants was confirmed. It was determined that an ultrawide implant can be used as an alternative when the bone quality in the posterior teeth is relatively low or when a previous implant has failed.-
dc.language영어-
dc.publisher대한악안면성형재건외과학회-
dc.titleRetrospective clinical study of ultrawide implants more than 6 mm in diameter-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s40902-016-0075-z-
dc.citation.journaltitleMaxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85090422117-
dc.citation.endpage6-
dc.citation.number1-
dc.citation.startpage1-
dc.citation.volume38-
dc.identifier.kciidART002137685-
dc.description.isOpenAccessY-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorYi, Yang Jin-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorYun, Pil Young-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Young Kyun-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorDiameter-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorOutcome-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorUltrawide implant-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Related Researcher

Yun, Pil Young Image

Yun, Pil Young윤필영
(기금)부교수
  • School of Dentistry
  • Department of Dentistry
Research Area Dentistry, Oral Pathology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 구강병리학, 구강악안면외과학, 치의학

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share