You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/125611
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPontes, Ana Emília Farias-
dc.contributor.authorRibeiro, Fernando Salimon-
dc.contributor.authorIezzi, Giovanna-
dc.contributor.authorPires, Juliana Rico-
dc.contributor.authorZuza, Elizangela Partata-
dc.contributor.authorPiattelli, Adriano-
dc.contributor.authorMarcantonio Júnior, Elcio-
dc.date.accessioned2015-08-06T16:12:36Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T20:53:17Z-
dc.date.available2015-08-06T16:12:36Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T20:53:17Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifierhttp://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2014/606947/-
dc.identifier.citationThe Scientific World Journal, v. 2014, p. 1-5, 2014.-
dc.identifier.issn2356-6140-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/125611-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/125611-
dc.description.abstractThe present study aims to evaluate the influence of apicocoronal position and immediate and conventional loading in the percentage of bone-implant contact (BIC). Thus, 36 implants were inserted in the edentulous mandible from six dogs. Three implants were installed in each hemimandible, in different positions in relation to the ridge: Bone Level (at crestal bone level), Minus 1 (one millimeter apical to crestal bone), and Minus 2 (two millimeters apical to crestal bone). In addition, each hemimandible was submitted to a loading protocol: immediate (prosthesis installed 24 hours after implantation) or conventional (prosthesis installed 120 days after implantation). Ninety days after, animals were killed, and implant and adjacent tissues were prepared for histometric analysis. BIC values from immediate loaded implants were 58.7%, 57.7%, and 51.1%, respectively, while conventional loaded implants were 61.8%, 53.8%, and 68.4%. Differences statistically significant were not observed among groups (𝑃 = 0.10, ANOVA test). These findings suggest that different apicocoronal positioning and loading protocols evaluated did not interfere in the percentage of boneimplant contact, suggesting that these procedures did not jeopardize osseointegration.en
dc.description.sponsorshipCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES-
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)-
dc.format.extent1-5-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.sourceCurrículo Lattes-
dc.titleBone-implant contact around crestal and subcrestal dental implants submitted to immediate and conventional loadingen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionCentro Universitário da Fundação Educacional de Barretos (UNIFEB)-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Chieti-Pescara (UNICH)-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.description.affiliationUniversity of Chieti-Pescara, Department of Oral Health Care Sciences, Dental School-
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Departamento de Diagnóstico e Cirurgia, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara-
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCAPES: 0989/05-3-
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: 04/08141-3-
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/606947-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto-
dc.identifier.fileISSN2356-6140-2014-2014-01-05.pdf-
dc.relation.ispartofThe Scientific World Journal-
dc.identifier.lattes6100859465871929-
dc.identifier.lattes5462131807341513-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.