ArticleORAL & implantology2009
Self bone graft and simultaneous application of implants in upper jawbone.
Article in ORAL & implantology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The implant supported rehabilitation of upper back sectors, sometimes, is conditioned to the pneumatization of the jawbone and so, reducing the possibility to apply the implants when the bone portion is inferior to 4 mm (important condition for the primary stability).The great rise of the jawbone and the simultaneous application of implants is, surely, the condition to have the best success guarantees compared to the only application of filling material.The surgical technologies used in the self bone grafts are various (Ilium crest, calvaria, fibula) and so also for implant applications.In this article we want to put in evidence a new technology in order to reduce at the minimum the invasive surgery of the removal and the patient morbidity.It has been executed a longitudinal study on 21 consecutive cases and illustrated by a clinical one; the success was of 94.5%. The advantages of this technique are: Functional and anatomical recovery of the jaw cavityImmediate application of implants with a thickness of remaining bone in fervor to 4 mm.Reduction of surgical timesReduced morbidity of the patientLocal an anesthesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23285370PMC3415343What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.