Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124)
Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124)
author: Tommaso Grandi,Luigi Svezia,Giovanni Grandi | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID
Length (mm)
8
18 (14.5%)
10
56 (45.2%)
11.5
43 (34.7%)
13
7 (5.6%)
Diameter (mm)
2.75
69 (55.6%)
3.25
55 (44.4%)
Insertion torque (Ncm)
30
21 (16.9%)
35
16 (12.9%)
40
10 (8.1%)
45
11 (8.9%)
50
32 (25.8%)
55
7 (5.6%)
60
16 (12.9%)
65
5 (4.1%)
70
6 (4.8%)
Serial posts:
-
Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
-
Background : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
-
Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (1)
-
Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (2)
-
Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (3)
-
Results: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
-
Discussion: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (1)
-
Discussion: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (2)
-
References: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
-
Figure 1. Characteristics of the implants used in the study
-
Table 1 Features of the subjects included in the study
-
Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124)
-
Table 4 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals in different implants diameters groups (2.75 and 3.25 mm)
-
Figure 2. Case 1: Example of one case involved in the study. a Preoperative view of a partial edentulism in posterior mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was 4 mm. c Four narrow diameter implants were placed and left to a nonsubmerged healing. d Baseline periapical radiograph. e Buccal vieew of the final metal ceramic restoration. f Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading
-
Figure 3. Example of another case involved in the study
| Length (mm) | 8 | 18 (14.5%) |
| 10 | 56 (45.2%) | |
| 11.5 | 43 (34.7%) | |
| 13 | 7 (5.6%) | |
| Diameter (mm) | 2.75 | 69 (55.6%) |
| 3.25 | 55 (44.4%) | |
| Insertion torque (Ncm) | 30 | 21 (16.9%) |
| 35 | 16 (12.9%) | |
| 40 | 10 (8.1%) | |
| 45 | 11 (8.9%) | |
| 50 | 32 (25.8%) | |
| 55 | 7 (5.6%) | |
| 60 | 16 (12.9%) | |
| 65 | 5 (4.1%) | |
| 70 | 6 (4.8%) |
- Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
- Background : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
- Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (1)
- Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (2)
- Methods : Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (3)
- Results: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
- Discussion: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (1)
- Discussion: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses (2)
- References: Narrow implants supporting a fixed splinted prostheses
- Figure 1. Characteristics of the implants used in the study
- Table 1 Features of the subjects included in the study
- Table 2 Dimensions (diameter and length) and final seating torque of the inserted implants (n = 124)
- Table 4 Comparison of mean bone levels (means ± SD) at different follow-up intervals in different implants diameters groups (2.75 and 3.25 mm)
- Figure 2. Case 1: Example of one case involved in the study. a Preoperative view of a partial edentulism in posterior mandible. b Preoperative CT scan. The width of the ridge was 4 mm. c Four narrow diameter implants were placed and left to a nonsubmerged healing. d Baseline periapical radiograph. e Buccal vieew of the final metal ceramic restoration. f Periapical radiograph at 1 year after loading
- Figure 3. Example of another case involved in the study