Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

DENTAL İMPLANTLARDA BAŞARI KRİTERLERİ VE BAŞARI DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNTEMLERİ

(THE CRITERIA AND THE EVALUATION METHODS FOR SUCCESS OF DENTAL IMPLANTS)

Journal Name:

  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2010

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The interpretation of clinical results of dental implant therapies is very crucial to be able to make a comparison between different implant systems and treatment modalities and furthermore to benefit the experiences of the other clinicians. However, the clinical outcomes of these studies should be reported in an objective way and be independent from the system used and also be prepared in accordance with certain criteria and standards that have been accepted scientifically world-wide for being reliable and describing long-term results. Up to date, various implant success criteria have been defined to express the success of the implants. In the literature reporting success rates of implant treatments, different methods have been used to describe the results statistically. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the implant success criteria recommended by different researchers, and statistical methods used to determine the clinical outcomes of dental implants.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Dental implant tedavilerini n klinik sonuçlarının yorumlanması, implant sistemleri ve tedavileri arasında bir karşılaştırma yapabilmek ve diğer hekimlerin tecrübelerinden faydalanabilmek açısından önem taşımaktadır. Ancak bu çalışmaların klinik sonuçlarının güvenilir olması ve uzun süreli başarıları tanımlaya-bilmesi için objektif, kullanılan sistemden bağımsız ve bilimsel olarak dünyaca kabul edilmiş belli kriterlere ve standartlara uygun olarak hazırlanması gerekmektedir. İmplantların başarısını ifade etmek üzere geçmişten bugüne birçok implant başarı kriteri tanımlanmıştır. Dental implant tedavilerin e ait başarı oranlarının yayınlandığı literatürlerde, sonuçların istatistiksel olarak ifadesinde değişik metotlar kullanılmaktadır. Bu makalenin amacı, farklı araştırmacılar tarafından önerilen implant başarı kriterleri ve dental implantların klinik sonuçlarının belirlenmesinde kullanılan istatistiksel yöntemleri değerlendirmektir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-dental-implantlarda-basari-kriterleri-basari-degerlendirme-yontemleri.pdf
  • 3
216-224
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Branemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindström J, Hallen O, Ohman A. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand. J. Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 1977;16: 1-132.
2. Albrektsson T, Zarb GA. Determinants of correct clinical reporting. Int J Prosthodont 1998; 11(5): 517-521.
3. Weng D, Jacobson Z, Tarnow D, Hürzeler MB, Faehn O, Sanavi F, Barkvoll P, Stach RM. A prospective multicenter clinical trial of 3i machined-surface implants: results after 6 years of follow-up. It. J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;
18(3): 417-423.
4. Albrerktsson T, Zarb G, Worthington D, Eriksson R. The long term efficiency of currently used dental implants. A review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986; 1(1):
11-25.
5. Schnitman PA, Shulman LB. Recommendations of the consensus devolepment conference on dental implants. J Am Dent Assoc 1979; 98(3): 373-377.
228
Atatürk Üniv. Diş Hek. Fak. Derg.
J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni
Cilt:20, Sayı: 3, Yıl: 2010, Sayfa: 221-229
6. Ten Bruggenkate CM, van der Kwast WA, Oosterbeek HS. Success criteria in oral implantology. A rewiev of the literature. Int J Oral Implantol 1990; 7(1): 45-51.
7. Smith DE, Zarb GA. Criteria for success of osseointegrated endosseous implants. J Prosthet
Dent 1989; 62(5): 567-572.
8. Buser D, Weber HP, Lang NP. Tissue integration of non-submerged implants 1 year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants. Clin Oral Implant Res 1990;
1(1): 33-40.
9. Naert IE, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, Darius P. A six-year prosthodontic study of 509 consecutively inserted implants for the treatment of partial edentulism. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67(2):
236-245.
10. Albrektsson T, Zarb GA. Current interpretations of the osseointegrated response. Clinical significance.
Int J Proshodont 1993; 6(2): 95-100.
11. Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Kebir M, Tecucianu JF. Oral İmplantoloji Klinik El Kitabı. 1. Basım. İstanbul; Quintessence Yayınları: 2004. 22-23.
12. Albrektsson T, Isidor F. Consensus report on session IV. Proceedings of 1st European Workshop on Periodontology. Lang NP, Karring T (Ed). London; Quintessence Publ. 1994: 364-369.
13. Roos J, Sennerby L, Lekholm U, Jemt T, Gröndahl K, Albrektsson T. A qualitative and quantitative method for evaluating implant success: A 5-year retrospective analysis of the Branemark implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997; 12(4): 504¬514.
14. Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Consensus report: towards optimized treatment for dental implants. J Prosthet
Dent 1998; 80(6): 641.
15. Iacono VJ, Commitee on Research, Science and Therapy, The American Academy of Periodontology. Dental implants in periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 2000; 71(12): 1934-1942.
16. Karoussis IK, Salvi GE, Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Brâgger U, Hâmmerle CH, Lang NP. Long-term implant prognosis in patients with and without a history of chronic periodontitis: a 10 year prospective cohort study of the ITI dental implant systems. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14(3): 329-339.
17. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang H, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P et al. Implant success,
KÜRKÇÜOĞLU, KÖROĞLU, ÖZKIR
survival, and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008; 17(1): 5-15.
18. Chuang SK, Tian L, Wei LJ, Dodson TB. Kaplan-Meier analysis of dental implant survival: A strategy for estimating survival with clustered observations. J Dent Res 2001; 80(11): 2016¬2020.
19. Chuang SK, Wei LJ, Douglass CW, Dodson TB. Risk factors for dental implant failure: A strategy for the analysis of clustered failure-time observations. J
Dent Res 2002; 81(8): 572-577.
20. Chuang SK, Cai T, Douglass CW, Tian L, Wei LJ, Dodson TB. Frailty approach for the analysis of clustered failure time observations in dental research. J Dent Res 2005; 84(1): 54-58.
21. Shulman LB, Rogoff GS, Savitt ED, Kent RL. Evaluations in reconstructive implantology. Dent Clin Nort Am 1986; 30(2): 327-350.
22. Guckes AD, Scurria MS, Shugars DA. A conceptual framework for understanding outcomes of oral implant theraphy. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75(6):
633-639.
23. Anderson JD. The need for criteria on reporting treatment outcomes. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79(1): 49-55.
24. Carr AB, Choi YG, Eckert SE, Desjardins RP. Retrospective cohort study of the clinical performance of 1 stage dental implants. J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18(3): 399-405.
25. Morris HFM, Ochi S. Clinical studies of endosseous dental implants: The good, the bad and the ugly. Ann Periodontol 2000; 5(1): 6-11.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com