{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,28]],"date-time":"2026-07-28T06:40:54Z","timestamp":1785220854574,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":26,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2002,1,19]],"date-time":"2002-01-19T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1011398400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":232,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Clinical Oral Implants Res"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2001,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:p><jats:bold>Abstract:<\/jats:bold> A total of 123 patients were followed between January 1983 and July 1998 with 140 tooth\u2010implant connected prostheses. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 20 to 79 years (mean 51.8). 339 (Br\u00e5nemark<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup> system) implants were connected to 313 teeth. The loading time ranged from 1.5 to 15 years (mean: 6.5). 123 patients were randomly selected as a control group with freestanding implant\u2010supported prostheses only. The age of the patients at prosthesis installation ranged from 22 to 78 years (mean 52.3). The loading time for the 329 freestanding (Br\u00e5nemark<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup> system) implants ranged from 1.3 to 14.5 years (mean: 6.2). Evolution of the marginal bone stability around the implant in the tooth\u2010implant connected as well as the freestanding group was studied with respect to the prognosis of the implants. Over the period from 0 to 15 years, there was significantly more marginal bone loss (0.7 mm) in tooth\u2010implant connected <jats:italic>versus<\/jats:italic> freestanding prostheses. No significant difference in marginal bone loss was found between the non\u2010rigid tooth\u2010implant connected prostheses <jats:italic>versus<\/jats:italic> freestanding prostheses. However, there was a significant difference in marginal bone loss for rigid and multi\u2010connected tooth\u2010implant connected prostheses <jats:italic>versus<\/jats:italic> freestanding ones. The results of this study indicate that more bone is lost around implants which are rigidly connected to teeth. This suggests that bending load, which is increased in tooth\u2010implant connected prostheses, might be responsible for this phenomenon. These observations favor the use of freestanding prostheses whenever possible. However, the clinical significance of greater bone loss in rigid <jats:italic>versus<\/jats:italic> non\u2010rigid connections might outweigh the annoying phenomenon of tooth intrusion in the case of non\u2010rigid tooth connection, when connection is considered.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2003,3,11]],"date-time":"2003-03-11T12:37:35Z","timestamp":1047386255000},"page":"245-251","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":75,"title":["Freestanding and tooth\u2010implant connected prostheses in the treatment of partially edentulous patients"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"12","author":[{"given":"Ignace E.","family":"Naert","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joke A. J.","family":"Duyck","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Mahmoud M. F.","family":"Hosny","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Marc","family":"Quirynen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Dani\u00ebl","family":"Van Steenberghe","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2002,1,19]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_6_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0300-9785(81)80077-4"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0300-9785(86)80010-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_4_1","first-page":"155","article-title":"Osseointegrated implants in edentulous jaws: a 2\u2010year longitudinal study.","volume":"5","author":"Ahlqvist J.","year":"1990","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_5_1","first-page":"11","article-title":"The long\u2010term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success.","volume":"1","author":"Albrektsson T.","year":"1986","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0501.1997.080508.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_7_1","first-page":"711","article-title":"Freestanding vs tooth\u2010connected implant\u2010supported fixed partial restorations: a comparative retrospective clinical study of the prosthetic results.","volume":"9","author":"Cavicchia F.","year":"1994","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_8_1","first-page":"91","article-title":"The longitudinal clinical efficacy of osseointegrated implants: a 4\u2010year report.","volume":"2","author":"Cox J.F.","year":"1987","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_9_1","first-page":"541","article-title":"Photoelastic stress analysis of natural teeth and three osseointegrated implant designs.","volume":"13","author":"Deines D.N.","year":"1993","journal-title":"International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-051X.1986.tb02227.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_11_1","first-page":"216","article-title":"Tooth\u2010implant and implant supported fixed partial dentures: a 10\u2010year report.","volume":"12","author":"Gunne J.","year":"1999","journal-title":"International Journal of Prosthodontics"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_12_1","first-page":"340","article-title":"Within\u2010subject comparison between connected and non\u2010connected tooth\u2010to\u2010implant fixed partial prostheses. An up to 14\u2010years follow\u2010up study.","volume":"13","author":"Hosny M.","year":"2000","journal-title":"International Journal of Prosthodontics"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_13_1","first-page":"33","article-title":"Factors related to success and failure rate at 3\u2010year follow\u2010up in a multicenter study of overdentures supported by Br\u00e5nemark implants.","volume":"10","author":"Hutton J.E.","year":"1995","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-80424-3"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_1","first-page":"11","article-title":"Clinical and roentgenological findings and occlusal measurements at implants in the free end situation.","volume":"1","author":"Kr\u00e4mer A.","year":"1990","journal-title":"Oral Surgery Oral Diagnosis"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-051X.1986.tb00847.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0022-3913(88)90109-6"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0022-3913(92)90461-I"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s007840050016"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003237.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-3913(99)70109-5"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-051X.1992.tb00450.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_23_1","first-page":"39","article-title":"Prosthetic considerations for the utilization of osseointegrated fixtures in the partially edentulous arch.","volume":"1","author":"Sullivan D.","year":"1986","journal-title":"International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0501.1996.090606.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0022-3913(89)90378-8"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/978-1-4612-2294-1"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1115\/1.2798322"}],"container-title":["Clinical Oral Implants Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1034%2Fj.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1034%2Fj.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,17]],"date-time":"2023-10-17T20:03:21Z","timestamp":1697573001000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x"}},"subtitle":["Part II: An up to 15\u2010years radiographic evaluation"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2001,6]]},"references-count":26,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2001,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2001.012003245.x","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0905-7161","1600-0501"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0905-7161","type":"print"},{"value":"1600-0501","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2001,6]]}}}