{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,30]],"date-time":"2026-04-30T16:26:08Z","timestamp":1777566368939,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":28,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2012,11,28]],"date-time":"2012-11-28T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1354060800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Clin Implant Dent Rel Res"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,8]]},"abstract":"Abstract<\/jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>New implant designs are continuously introduced to the market. It is important to evaluate and report on their clinical performance when used in everyday practice.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Purpose<\/jats:title>The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel hydrophilic dental implant for 1 year.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Materials and Methods<\/jats:title>A total of 49 patients previously treated with 102 hydrophilic dental implants (N<\/jats:styled-content>eoss P<\/jats:styled-content>roactive, N<\/jats:styled-content>eoss L<\/jats:styled-content>td, H<\/jats:styled-content>arrogate, UK<\/jats:styled-content>) were retrospectively evaluated with regard to survival rate and marginal bone loss. Fifty\u2010four implants were installed in maxillae and 48 in mandibles to replace single teeth (n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u200921), to support partial bridges (n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u200926), total maxillary bridges (n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20092), or mandibular overdentures (n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20092). The majority of patients (n<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u200937) had implants placed in healed sites without any adjunctive procedures. In 12 patients, implants were immediately placed in extraction sockets or in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation. All implant sites had been classified according to the L<\/jats:styled-content>ekholm and Z<\/jats:styled-content>arb index. Baseline and 1\u2010year intraoral radiographs were used to calculate marginal bone levels and bone loss. Implant stability quotient (ISQ<\/jats:styled-content>) measurements had been taken at placement and after 3 to 4 months of healing<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Results<\/jats:title>The implants became rapidly covered with blood at the first contact. One implant was lost, giving a cumulative survival rate (CSR<\/jats:styled-content>) of 99.0% after 1 year. The marginal bone loss amounted to 0.7\u2009\u00b1\u20090.6\u2009mm with 3.5% of the implants showing more than 2\u2009mm of bone loss and no implant more than 3\u2009mm bone loss after 1 year. The primary stability was found to be 72.7\u2009\u00b1\u20097.5 ISQ<\/jats:styled-content>, which slightly increased to 73.6\u2009\u00b1\u20097.2 ISQ<\/jats:styled-content> (NS<\/jats:styled-content>) after 3 to 4 months of healing. The stability was significantly higher in the mandible than in the maxilla at placement and after healing.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>Conclusion<\/jats:title>In this limited clinical study, the use of a novel hydrophilic dental implant results in favorable short\u2010term outcomes.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1111\/cid.12022","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2012,11,28]],"date-time":"2012-11-28T20:58:31Z","timestamp":1354136311000},"page":"511-519","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":12,"title":["One\u2010Year Clinical and Radiographic Results with a Novel Hydrophilic Titanium Dental Implant"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"16","author":[{"given":"Werner","family":"Degasperi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Clinica Feltre Feltre Italy"},{"name":"Fiera Di Primiero Italy"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Peter","family":"Andersson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Clinica Feltre Feltre Italy"},{"name":"Fiera Di Primiero Italy"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Damiano","family":"Verrocchi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Fiera Di Primiero Italy"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Lars","family":"Sennerby","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Clinica Feltre Feltre Italy"},{"name":"Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Institute of Odontology University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2012,11,28]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0501.2004.01117.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708-8208.2009.00182.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_5_1","first-page":"408","article-title":"Surgical determinants of clinical success of osseointegrated oral implants: a review of the literature","volume":"11","author":"Sennerby L","year":"1998","journal-title":"Int J Prosthodont"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_6_1","first-page":"816","article-title":"Failure rates of short (\u226410\u2009mm) dental implants and factors influencing their failure: a systematic review","volume":"26","author":"Sun HL","year":"2011","journal-title":"Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0722.2008.00571.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0757.2007.00244.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0501.2009.01775.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2147\/CCIDE.S15949"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_11_1","first-page":"36","article-title":"Insertion torque measurements during placement of Neoss implants","volume":"6","author":"Pagliani L","year":"2008","journal-title":"Appl Osseointegration Res"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_12_1","first-page":"8","article-title":"Histological and biomechanical aspects of surface topography and geometry of Neoss implants. A study in rabbits","volume":"6","author":"Sennerby L","year":"2008","journal-title":"Appl Osseointegration Res"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708-8208.2010.00273.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708-8208.2010.00286.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708-8208.2010.00314.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708\u20108208.2011.00356.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708\u20108208.2011.00378.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1708\u20108208.2010.00333.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_19_1","unstructured":"GotttlowJ SennerbyL.An experimental comparison of Neoss implants with either a double blasted or a blasted and acid\u2010etched hydrophilic surface. In manuscript."},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_20_1","first-page":"49","article-title":"A comparative retrospecitve follow up of patients treated with implants either with a blasted or super hydrophilic surface with or without an adjunctive GBR procedure","volume":"3","author":"Zumstein T","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Implant Adv Clin Dent"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_21_1","first-page":"199","volume-title":"Tissue\u2010integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry","author":"Lekholm U","year":"1985"},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_5_1_22_1","first-page":"e95","article-title":"Clinical experience of TiUnite implants: a 5\u2010year cross\u2010sectional, retrospective follow\u2010up study","volume":"12","author":"Friberg B","year":"2010","journal-title":"Clin Implant Dent Relat Res"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_23_1","first-page":"536","article-title":"Oral implant surfaces: part 1 \u2013 review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them","volume":"17","author":"Albrektsson T","year":"2004","journal-title":"Int J Prosthodont"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/j.0022-0337.2003.67.8.tb03681.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0501.2000.011006530.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.dental.2006.06.025"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_27_1","first-page":"27","article-title":"Case reports describing the \u201cbump\u201d: a new phenomenon in implant healing","volume":"2","author":"Rosen P","year":"2010","journal-title":"J Implant Adv Clin Dent"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0757.2008.00267.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_1_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1399-0020.1999.284280412.x"}],"container-title":["Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1111%2Fcid.12022","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/cid.12022","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,3]],"date-time":"2023-10-03T14:12:54Z","timestamp":1696342374000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/cid.12022"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,11,28]]},"references-count":28,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/cid.12022"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/cid.12022","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1523-0899","1708-8208"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1523-0899","type":"print"},{"value":"1708-8208","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2012,11,28]]}}}