1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70116-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Current perspectives in residual ridge remodeling and its clinical implications: A review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

4
122
0
14

Year Published

2000
2000
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 154 publications
(140 citation statements)
references
References 97 publications
4
122
0
14
Order By: Relevance
“…The observation interval of this study was three months, shorter than those of the abovementioned studies. Since the alveolar bone resorption continues throughout life (Jahangiri et al, 1998), the longer the interval, the greater will be the amount of bone resorption. In addition, it was well established that the elevation of a full-thickness flap might cause crestal alveolar bone loss of about 0.6 mm (Wood et al, 1972), making tooth extraction no longer the sole factor causing alveolar bone resorption (Fickl et al, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The observation interval of this study was three months, shorter than those of the abovementioned studies. Since the alveolar bone resorption continues throughout life (Jahangiri et al, 1998), the longer the interval, the greater will be the amount of bone resorption. In addition, it was well established that the elevation of a full-thickness flap might cause crestal alveolar bone loss of about 0.6 mm (Wood et al, 1972), making tooth extraction no longer the sole factor causing alveolar bone resorption (Fickl et al, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, concurrent with new bone growth into the extraction socket, there is also resorption of the alveolar bone. Many studies have demonstrated that the height and especially the width of the alveolar bone decrease significantly after tooth extraction (Lam, 1960;Pietrokovski and Massler, 1967;Johnson, 1969;Jahangiri et al, 1998;Schropp et al, 2003;Araujo and Lindhe, 2005;Kerr et al, 2008;van der Weijden et al, 2009), leading to insufficient bone volume at the implant site.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many studies have demonstrated that the height and especially the width of the alveolar ridge decrease significantly after tooth extraction (Lam, 1960;Pietrokovski and Massler, 1967;Johnson, 1969;Jahangiri et al, 1998;Schropp et al, 2003;Araujo and Lindhe, 2005;Kerr et al, 2008;van der Weijden et al, 2009). A clinical study reported a reduction of 50% in the width of the alveolar ridge at 12 months and an average bone loss of between 5 and 7 mm (Schropp et al, 2003), leading to insufficient bone volume at the implant site.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, concurrent with new bone growth into the extraction socket, there is also well-documented resorption of the alveolar ridge, resulting in its decreased height and width (Lam, 1960;Pietrokovski and Massler, 1967;Johnson, 1969;Jahangiri et al, 1998;Schropp et al, 2003;Araujo and Lindhe, 2005;Kerr et al, 2008;van der Weijden et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Extreme resorption of the maxillary denture bearing area may lead to problems with prosthetic rehabilitation. These may be due to narrower, more constricted residual ridge as resorption progresses, decreased supporting tissues and a resultant large restorative space between the maxillary and mandibular residual ridge.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%