Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,286

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Long‐term evaluation of non‐submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8‐year life table analysis of a prospective multi‐center study with 2359 implants.

Buser, Daniel, Mericske‐stern, Regina, Pierre Bernard, Jean Pierre, Behneke, Alexandra, Behneke, Niklaus, Hirt, Hans Peter, Belser, Urs C., Lang, Niklaus P.·1997·Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract

In the present multi‐center study. non‐submerged ITI implants were prospectively followed to evaluate their long‐term prognosis in fully and partially edentulous patients. In a total of 1003 patients, 2359 implants were consecutively inserted. Following a healing period of 3–6 months, the successfully integrated implants were restored with 393 removable and 758 fixed restorations. Subsequently, all consecutive implants were documented annually up to 8 years. At each examination, the clinical status of all implants was evaluated according to predefined criteria of success. Therefore, the data base allowed the evaluation of 8‐year cumulative survival and success rates for 2359 implants. In addition, cumulative success rates were calculated for implant subgroups divided per implant type, implant length. and implant location. Furthermore, the actual 5‐year survival and success rates could be determined for 488 implants. During the healing period, 13 implants did not successfully integrate, whereas 2346 implants fulfilled the predefined criteria of success. This corresponds with an early failure rate of 0.55%. During follow‐up, 19 implants were classified as failures due to several reasons. In addition, 17 implants (= 0.8%) demonstrated at the last annual examination a suppurative periimplant infection. Including 127 drop out implants (= 5.4% drop out rate) into the calculation, the 8‐year cumulative survival and success rates resulted in 96.7% and 93.3%, respectively. The analysis of implant subgroups showed slightly more favorable cumulative success rates for screw type implants (> 95%) compared to hollow‐cylinder implants (91.3%). and clearly better success rates for mandibular implants (= 95%) when compared to maxillary implants (= 87%). The actual 5‐year survival and success rates of 488 implants with 98.2% and 97.3%. respectively, were slightly better than the estimated 5‐year cumulative survival and success rates of 2359 implants indicating that the applied life table analysis is a reliable statistical method to evaluate the long‐term prognosis of dental implants. It can be concluded that non‐submerged ITI implants maintain success rates well above 90% in different clinical centers for observation periods up to 8 years.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,286

Metadata

Authors
Buser, D., Mericske‐stern, R., Pierre Bernard, J. P., Behneke, A., Behneke, N., Hirt, H. P., Belser, U. C., & Lang, N. P.
Venue
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-06
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
161-172
ISSN
  • 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0501
OpenAlex
W1995336629
Cited by
1,286
References
0
FWCI
41.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long‐term evaluation of non‐submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8‐year life table analysis of a prospective multi‐center study with 2359 implants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x
The paper
Buser, D., Mericske‐stern, R., Pierre Bernard, J. P., Behneke, A., Behneke, N., Hirt, H. P., Belser, U. C., & Lang, N. P. (1997). Long‐term evaluation of non‐submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8‐year life table analysis of a prospective multi‐center study with 2359 implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.