The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to assess peri-implant tissue conditions and document peri-implant tissue stability in C-Tech implants when placed simultaneously with a GBR augmentation procedure.
Table 1 Participating patients and the number and site of the inserted implants
author: Jonas Lorenz,Henriette Lerner, Robert A Sader, Shahram Ghanaati | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID
Patient | Gender (m/f) | Age (years) | Implant localization (region) | Implant diameter (mm) | Implant length (mm) | Augmentation material | Prosthetic rehabilitation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | f | 50 | 32 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | r.p |
34 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | r.p | |||
42 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | r.p | |||
44 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | r.p | |||
2 | m | 61 | 36 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
37 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
46 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
47 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
3 | m | 48 | 26 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
4 | f | 54 | 21 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
5 | f | 45 | 23 | 3.5 | 13 | HA | f.p. |
26 | 4.3 | 11 | HA | f.p. | |||
27 | 4.3 | 11 | HA | f.p. | |||
6 | m | 56 | 32 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
42 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
7 | m | 54 | 36 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
46 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
36 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
8 | f | 73 | 16 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
26 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
9 | m | 64 | 27 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
10 | f | 62 | 15 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
16 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
17 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
24 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
36 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
46 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
11 | f | 75 | 35 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
36 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
12 | f | 52 | 16 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
13 | m | 46 | 24 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
25 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
26 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
46 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
14 | f | 66 | 36 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
37 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
15 | f | 63 | 11 | 3.5 | 13 | HA | f.p. |
16 | f | 53 | 36 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
46 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
47 | 3.5 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
17 | f | 51 | 14 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
15 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
18 | m | 60 | 27 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
47 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
19 | m | 75 | 22 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
24 | 3.5 | 13 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. | |||
20 | m | 62 | 26 | 4.3 | 11 | HA + β-TCP | f.p. |
Total 20 | Total 11*f; 9*m | Mean 58.5 | Total 47; 23*u.j, 24*l.j. | Total 32*3.5 mm, 15*4.3 mm | Total 37*11 mm, 10*13 mm | Total 43*HA + β-TCP, 4*HA | Total 43*f.p., 4*r.p |
Serial posts:
- Investigation of peri-implant in implants
- Background: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (1)
- Background: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (2)
- Background: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (3)
- Methods: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (1)
- Methods: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (2)
- Results: Investigation of peri-implant in implants
- Discussion: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (1)
- Discussion: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (2)
- Discussion: Investigation of peri-implant in implants (3)
- Discussion: Investigation of peri-implant in implants
- Table 1 Participating patients and the number and site of the inserted implants
- Table 2 Results from the clinical and radiological 3-year follow-up investigation
- Figure 1. Schematic representation of the technical characteristics
- Figure 2. Clinical image of patient 4