OR Foundation
  • About
    • Oral Reconstruction Foundation
      • Purpose and Mission
      • Foundation Board
      • Scientific Working Group
      • Education Working Group
      • History
      • Career
      • News
  • Granting
    • Requirements
    • Application
  • Publications
    • Grant Publications
    • Consensus Publications
  • Awards
    • Research Award
      • Awards 2018/2019
      • Award 2016/2017
      • Award 2014/2015
      • Award 2012/2013
      • Award 2010/2011
      • Award 2008/2009
    • Poster Competition
      • Competition 2018
      • Competition 2016
      • Competition 2014
      • Competition 2012
  • Education
    • International Symposia
    • Global Symposia
    • National Symposia
    • Curriculum
    • Education Courses
    • Webinars
  • Contact
Select Page

Loading protocols and implant supported restorations proposed for the rehabilitation of partially and fully edentulous jaws. Camlog Foundation Consensus Report.


Schwarz F, Sanz-MartĂ­n I, Kern JS, Taylor T, Schaer A, Wolfart S, Sanz M.

Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27(8):988-92

Abstract

Objective:

The aim of this consensus meeting was to assess whether immediate loading protocols achieve comparable clinical outcomes when compared to conventional loading protocols depending on the type of prosthetic restoration. In addition post-loading implant loss for implant supported prostheses in edentulous jaws was analyzed regarding a potential impact of implant location (maxilla vs. mandible), implant number per patient, type of prosthesis (removable vs. fixed), and type of attachment system (screw-retained, ball vs. bar vs. telescopic crown).

Material and methods:

Two comprehensive systematic reviews were prepared in advance of the meeting. Consensus statements, practical recommendations, and implications for future research were based on within group as well as plenary scrutinization and discussions of these systematic reviews.

Results:

The survival rates are high for immediate loaded and conventional loaded implants, but immediate loading may impose a greater risk for implant failure. The estimated implant loss rate is influenced by the implant location, type of restoration, and implant number.

Conclusion:

Consistent reporting of clinical studies is necessary and high-quality studies are needed to confirm the present results.

SOURCE

Latest Research Award Winners

Dr. Yifan Zhang
Quantitative Clinical Adjustment Analysis of Posterior Single Implant Crown in a Chairside Digital Workflow: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2019;30:1059-1066

Read more

Dr. Hyun-Chang Lim
Tissue integration of zirconia and titanium implants with and without buccal dehiscence defects — A histologic and radiographic preclinical study. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2019;30:660-9

Read more

Dr. Lorenzo Tavelli
Acellular dermal matrix and coronally advanced flap or tunnel technique in the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions. A 12-year follow-up from a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2019;46:937-48

Read more

Dr. Lukasz Witek
Repair of critical-sized long bone defects using dipyridamole-augmented 3D-printed bioactive ceramic scaffolds. J Orthop Res. 2019;37:2499-507

Read more

Oral Reconstruction Foundation


Margarethenstrasse 38 

4053 Basel
Switzerland

Phone: +41 61 565 41 51
Email: info@orfoundation.org

OR Foundation – U.S. Section

2300 Riverchase Center
Birmingham, AL 35244
USA
Phone: +1 205 986 7989
Email: info.us@orfoundation.org

Newsletter

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS

© Oral Reconstruction Foundation 2023 | Imprint | Disclaimer | Privacy | Sitemap | Professional websites Basel