Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

11 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-Year results of a randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To test whether or not the use of a short implant with a cantilever results in similar clinical and radiographic outcomes compared to two adjacent short implants with single tooth reconstructions.

Materials and methods

Thirty-six patients with two adjacent missing teeth in the posterior region were randomly assigned to receive either a single 6-mm implant with a cantilever (ONE-C) or two 6-mm implants (TWO). Fixed reconstructions were inserted 3-6 months after implant placement and patients were re-examined up to 5 years (FU-5).

Results

A total of 26 patients were available for re-examination at FU-5. The survival rate amounted to 84.2% in ONE-C and to 80.4% in TWO (inter-group: p = .894). Technical complication rates amounted to 64.2% (ONE-C) and to 54.4% (TWO) (inter-group: p = 1.000). From baseline to FU-5, the median changes of the marginal bone levels were 0.13 mm in ONE-C and 0.05 mm in TWO (inter-group: p = .775). Probing depth, bleeding on probing, and plaque control record values showed no significant differences between the two treatment modalities (p > .05).

Conclusions

Short implants with a cantilever render similar clinical and radiographic outcomes compared to two adjacent short implants at 5 years, however, they tend to fail at earlier time points suggesting an overload of the implants. Considering the modest survival rates, the clinical indication of either treatment option needs to be carefully evaluated. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01649531).

SUBMITTER: Thoma DS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9292666 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Short strategic implants for mandibular removable partial dentures: One-year results from a pilot randomized crossover abutment type study.

Project description:ObjectivesThe present pilot study analyzed two abutment types (a retentive ball and a non-retentive dome) in implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) on 6 mm short implants with respect to clinical, radiological, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), during the first year.Materials and methodsTwo implants were placed bilaterally in mandibular molar sites, converting existing free-end removable partial dentures (RPDs) to IARPDs. Twelve subjects were randomized to initially receive either the dome (Group A, n = 6) or the ball abutment (Group B, n = 6). After eight weeks, the abutments were exchanged. After another 8 weeks, the participants were given the choice of one of the abutments. Mean values and standard deviations (SD) were calculated, and random-effect linear regression analyses were applied to analyze marginal bone level alterations and PROs (α < .05).ResultsTwelve participants were included in the study; however, one dropout occurred. Patient ratings increased significantly in both study groups. The majority of the participants (82%) ultimately chose the ball abutment. The implant survival rate was 100%, and the success rate was 90.9% twelve months after implant placement (mean peri-implant bone-loss: -1.2; SD: 0.6 mm) without a statistically significant difference between the study groups, in terms of clinical- and radiological outcomes.ConclusionPlacing 6 mm short implants at mandibular molar sites of RPD wearers seems to be a viable treatment option, based on this investigation with a short-term follow-up. Although only minor differences between the two abutments were observed, patients seem to prefer the ball over the dome abutment.

| S-EPMC9292160 | biostudies-literature

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one-stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost-effective than two-stage (expander-implant) breast reconstruction. METHODS:The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open-label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR were randomized between one-stage IBBR with ADM or two-stage IBBR. Duration of surgery and hospital stay, and visits for the primary surgery, unplanned and cosmetic procedures were recorded. Costs were estimated at an institutional level. Health status was assessed by means of the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L questionnaire. RESULTS:Fifty-nine patients (91 breasts) underwent one-stage IBBR with ADM and 62 patients (92 breasts) two-stage IBBR. The mean(s.d.) duration of surgery in the one-stage group was significantly longer than that for two-stage IBBR for unilateral (2·52(0·55) versus 2·02(0·35) h; P < 0·001) and bilateral (4·03(1·00) versus 3·25(0·58) h; P = 0·017) reconstructions. Costs were higher for one-stage compared with two-stage IBBR for both unilateral (€12 448 (95 per cent c.i. 10 722 to 14 387) versus €9871 (9373 to 10 445) respectively; P = 0·025) and bilateral (€16 939 (14 887 to 19 360) versus €13 383 (12 414 to 14 669); P = 0·002) reconstructions. This was partly related to the use of relatively expensive ADM. There was no difference in postoperative health status between the groups. CONCLUSION:One-stage IBBR with ADM was associated with higher costs, but similar health status, compared with conventional two-stage IBBR. Registration number: NTR5446 ( http://www.trialregister.nl).

| S-EPMC6593424 | biostudies-literature

Baerveldt Glaucoma Implant versus Ahmed Glaucoma Implant in a One-Year Follow Up, Comparative Study.

Project description:AimTo compare clinical outcomes between Ahmed glaucoma implant (AGV-S2 and FP7 models) and Baerveldt-350 glaucoma implant (BGI).DesignProspective randomized study.Methods and subjectsEighty-one participants with glaucoma after ocular surgery or secondary glaucoma with persistent and uncontrolled IOP > 21 mmHg were randomized for placement of BGI or AGV models using a standardized surgical technique. The primary outcome was failure, which was defined as IOP >16 mmHg with glaucoma medication, on 2 consecutive study visits. Secondary outcomes were IOP, medication use, visual acuity, complications, and interventions.ResultsAt one-year follow up, the mean IOP was 14.76±2.5 mmHg in BGI group and 16.57±3.35 mmHg in AGV group (P=0.015). The mean number of glaucoma medications in use was 1.6±0.81 in the BGI group and 3.91±0. 0.28 in the AGV group (P <0.001). There was 1.81 mmHg difference in the mean IOP between participants in both groups with 0.85 SD difference. At 12 months, the failure rate was 11/56 (19.67%) in AGV group and 3/25 (12%) in BGI group (P=0.352). The VA was stable in 77% in the BGI group (P=0.93) versus 80% of patients in AGV group (P=0.88). No significant change was observed in logMAR Snellen VA between both groups (P=0.254). None of the patients lost light perception.ConclusionBoth the Ahmed valve implant and the Baerveldt implant are effective in reducing preoperative IOP and glaucoma medications in patients with refractory glaucoma. This trial cannot give clear clinical proof for valve superiority over the other. The Baerveldt-350 implant can be a good choice for refractory glaucoma cases. Capsular scarring around the plate is considered as the main factor for surgical failure and resistant IOP.Trial registrationThe trial was registered with the Research Ethical Committee, Ain Shams University, FWA 000017585 FMASU 21/2017, and registered at Clinical Trial. gov: NCT04215575.

| S-EPMC6955622 | biostudies-literature

2-year results of middle-aged patients with two-compartment cartilage lesions in one knee treated with two patient specific metal implants.

Project description:PurposeFocal chondral lesions of the femur are currently treated with biological repair or arthroplasty. However, some patients are not suitable for either one due to lesion size, age, or prior biological treatment attempts. While singular patient-specific focal mini metal implants already showed good results, the outcomes of bicompartmental implantation of these implants have not been discussed in the literature yet. This study aims to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients who underwent bicompartmental implantation of two patient-specific implants.MethodsThis prospective, non-randomized, non-comparative pilot study evaluates results up to two years after bicompartmental implantation of two implants (Episealer Implant, Episurf, Stockholm, Sweden). A damage report is compiled using a special MRI program and patient specific implants are manufactured, including 3D-printed surgical instruments to provide exact placement of the implant. The patients were assessed repeatedly using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain during the follow-up.ResultsThe scores were evaluated three, 12, and 24 months after surgery and showed good results. The median in both scores improved from 37.7 for the KOOS5 preoperatively to 69.1 after 24 months and from 69 for the VAS for pain preoperatively to 9 after 24 months.ConclusionOverall, for the small study group presented, the early results are promising. With noticeable improvement in KOOS and VAS for pain after two years, patient specific implants appear to become relevant in future standardized treatment of femoral chondral lesions. Especially with bicompartmental implantation, full arthroplasty can be delayed even further.Level of evidenceIV.

| S-EPMC10501106 | biostudies-literature

Cemented versus screw-retained zirconia-based single-implant restorations: 5-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare cemented and screw-retained one-piece zirconia-based restorations in terms of clinical, radiographic, and technical outcomes 5 years after insertion.Materials and methodsThirty-four patients with single-tooth implants were randomly restored with either a cemented lithium disilicate crown on a one-piece customized zirconia abutment (CEM, 17 patients) or a screw-retained crown based on a directly veneered one-piece customized zirconia abutment (SCREW, 16 patients). All patients were recalled for a baseline examination (7-10 days after crown insertion) and then annually up to 5 years. The following outcomes were assessed: marginal bone level (changes), technical, and clinical (bleeding on probing, plaque control record, probing depth, and keratinized tissue) parameters. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to assess differences between the two groups.ResultsAt 5 years, 26 patients (13 in each group) were re-examined. The survival rates on the implant and restorative levels were 100% and 82.4% (equally for both groups), respectively. At 5 years, the median marginal bone level was located at -0.15 mm (IQR: -0.89 mm; 0.27 mm) (CEM) and -0.26 mm (IQR: -0.38 mm; 0.01 mm) (SCREW) below the implant shoulder (intergroup p = .9598). The median changes between baseline and the 5-year follow-up amounted to -0.23 mm (CEM; intragroup p = .0002) and -0.15 mm (SCREW; intragroup p = .1465) (intergroup p = .1690). The overall technical complication rate at 5 years was 15.4% (CEM) and 15.4% (SCREW) (intergroup p = 1.00). Clinical parameters remained stable over time (baseline to 5 years).ConclusionsAt 5 years, screw-retained and cemented restorations rendered largely the same clinical, technical, and radiographic outcomes. Technical complications were frequent in both groups.

| S-EPMC9305781 | biostudies-literature

IDEAL IMPLANT Structured Breast Implants: Core Study Results at 6 Years.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The structured breast implant uses different technology than saline or silicone gel implants, making it a third type of implant. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada granted approval in November of 2014. This implant is filled with saline but has an internal structure consisting of a series of nested shells that support the upper pole when upright and control fluid movement. It combines certain key features and benefits of saline and silicone gel implants. As with saline, the filler is only saline, which women like for peace of mind in case of rupture/deflation. As with silicone gel, it has a natural feel, but without the risk of silent rupture and U.S. Food and Drug Administration-recommended magnetic resonance imaging scans-women can simply look in the mirror and know their implants are intact. METHODS:This U.S. trial enrolled 502 women: 399 primary augmentations and 103 replacements of existing augmentation implants. Investigators were 45 American Board of Plastic Surgery-certified plastic surgeons at 35 sites. Of the 502 women enrolled, 438 (87.3 percent) completed 6-year follow-up visits, a higher percentage than other Core breast implant trials. RESULTS:At 6 years, patient satisfaction was 89.7 percent for primary and 91.6 percent for replacement augmentations; surgeon satisfaction was 92.6 percent for primary and 94.0 percent for replacement augmentation. Kaplan-Meier adverse event rates were as follows: Baker grade III and IV capsular contracture, 5.7 percent for primary and 11.5 percent for replacement augmentation; and rupture/deflation, 1.8 percent for primary and 4.7 percent for replacement augmentation. CONCLUSION:Six-year results from 438 women show that the structured breast implant has high patient and surgeon satisfaction, a low rate of capsular contracture, and a low rate of rupture/deflation. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, IV.

| S-EPMC6045953 | biostudies-literature

Natrelle 410 Extra-Full Projection Silicone Breast Implants: 2-Year Results from Two Prospective Studies.

Project description:BackgroundThe safety and effectiveness of the Natrelle Style 410 highly cohesive silicone gel breast implant (Allergan, Inc., Irvine, Calif.) in full or moderate height and projection have been shown in a 10-year study. Extra-full projection implants may be an appropriate option for some women undergoing breast reconstruction.MethodsA total of 2795 women received at least one Natrelle 410 extra-full projection implant (X-style) for breast reconstruction in two similarly designed, prospective, multicenter studies. Data collected for 2 years after implantation in these studies were pooled to evaluate complication rates and subject and physician satisfaction.ResultsMost subjects (76.0 percent) underwent bilateral reconstruction; a total of 4912 devices were implanted. Complication rates at 2 years were low. The most common complications were asymmetry (4.8 percent) and capsular contracture (3.3 percent). The cumulative risk of reoperation was 21.6 percent by subject and 16.6 percent by device; the most common reasons for reoperation were scarring (n = 97), asymmetry (n = 89), implant malposition (n = 78), and infection (n = 71). Subject and physician satisfaction rates exceeded 90 percent. At 2 years, 97 percent of physicians reported that the shape of the breast reflected the shape of the implant, and that the breast implant had maintained its original position.ConclusionsThe safety profile of the Natrelle 410 extra-full projection implant mirrors that of its moderate projection and full projection counterparts. Both physicians and subjects were highly satisfied with the implants 2 years after surgery.Clinical question/level of evidenceTherapeutic, IV.

| S-EPMC4754780 | biostudies-literature

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: Two-Year Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.

Project description:ObjectiveReport the 2-year outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing robotic versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh ventral hernia repair.BackgroundVentral hernia repair is one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons. To our knowledge, no studies have been published to date comparing long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral hernia repair.MethodsThe trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03490266). Clinical outcomes included surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, hernia occurrence, readmission, reoperation, and mortality.ResultsA total of 175 consecutive patients were approached that were deemed eligible for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. In all, 124 were randomized and 101 completed follow-up at 2 years. Two-year follow-up was completed in 54 patients (83%) in the robotic arm and 47 patients (80%) in the laparoscopic arm. No differences were seen in surgical site infection or surgical site occurrence. Hernia recurrence occurred in 2 patients (4%) receiving robotic repair versus in 6 patients (13%) receiving laparoscopic repair (relative risk: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.06-1.39; P =0.12). No patients (0%) required reoperation in the robotic arm whereas 5 patients (11%) underwent reoperation in the laparoscopic arm ( P =0.019, relative risk not calculatable due to null outcome).ConclusionsRobotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated at least similar if not improved outcomes at 2 years compared with laparoscopy. There is potential benefit with robotic repair; however, additional multi-center trials and longer follow-up are needed to validate the hypothesis-generating findings of this study.

| S-EPMC10966958 | biostudies-literature

Modified tarsorrhaphy versus gold weight implant technique for paralytic lagophthalmos treatment in patients with leprosy: One-year observation of a randomized controlled trial study.

Project description:Trial designThis study was a multicenter, Prospective Randomized Open-label Blinded-Endpoint (PROBE) clinical trial, parallel-group study conducted in Indonesia (three sites).MethodsThe aim of this study was to compare the effectivity and efficiency of modified tarsorrhaphy (MT) and gold weight implant (GWI) techniques in the surgical treatment of paralytic lagophthalmos in patients with leprosy. The study sample consisted of 23 eyes, with 11 eyes in the MT group and the remaining 12 eyes in the GWI group-the control group.ResultsThe central eyelid margin distance (lagophthalmos distance) decreased when gentle pressure was applied in the MT (3.09 mm to 0.43 mm) and GWI groups (3.21 mm to 0.83 mm) at postoperative year 1. The Ocular Surface Disease Index score, the tear break-up time, and the Schirmer test without and with anesthesia in the MT and GWI groups showed a p-value of > 0.05. Epitheliopathy improvement occurred in 54.55% of the MT group and 58.33% of the GWI group. Corneal sensitivity change in the inferior quadrant of the MT group (50.00 to 51.30 mm) and in the GWI group (49.61 to 52.93 mm) resulted in a p > 0.05. Postoperative complications occurred in 15% of patients in the GWI group. In addition, the surgery duration of both techniques was similar. Furthermore, the surgery cost in the MT and GWI groups yielded a p < 0.05.ConclusionThe MT technique is as effective as the GWI technique but more efficient than the GWI technique as a surgical treatment for paralytic lagophthalmos in patients with leprosy.Clinical trial registration[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT0494 4498].

| S-EPMC9845573 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of Using One Trabecular Microbypass Stent versus Two during Cataract Surgery at Two Sites: One-Year Follow-Up.

Project description:PurposeTo compare IOP and ocular hypotensive medication reduction of using one trabecular microbypass stent versus two in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Setting. Palo Alto Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital and the Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA.DesignRetrospective case series.MethodsA chart review included patients who underwent trabecular microbypass implantation with cataract surgery in 2015-2017, with at least one-year follow-up. Subjects were divided into two groups by location (always one stent at Stanford versus two stents at the VA). Primary outcome measures included IOP and medication reduction at baseline and 12-month follow-up.Results132 subjects (166 eyes) were included. The preoperative IOP was 16.3 ± 3.4 mmHg on 2.6 ± 1.1 medications in the one-stent group (N = 85) and 17.5 ± 3.1 mmHg on 2.7 ± 0.6 medications in the two-stent group (N = 81). There was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.06). At the 12-month visit, there was a 13.37% ± 2.93 reduction in IOP in the 1-stent group (p ≤ 0.001) and 13.49% ± 2.69 in the 2-stent group (p ≤ 0.001); both were not significantly different from each other (p = 0.074). At 12 months, there was also a 14.5% reduction in medication use for the 1-stent group and 15.3% reduction in the 2-stent group, both statistically significant from baseline, (p = 0.022 and p = 0.037, respectively).ConclusionsImplantation with either one or two stents during cataract surgery in patients with glaucoma demonstrated similar IOP and med reduction in both groups between the two sites.

| S-EPMC7166285 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data