\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter \IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}% {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}% {\RequirePackage{color}} \usepackage{colortbl} \usepackage{wrapfig} \usepackage{ifxetex} \ifxetex \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{xunicode} \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash} \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{} \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}} \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}} \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}} \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}} \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono} \else \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}% {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc} \PrerenderUnicode{–} }% {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}} \usepackage[english]{babel} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{float} \usepackage[]{ucs} \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash } \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{} \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}} \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}} \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,} \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ } \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>} \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}} \def\textJapanese{} \def\textChinese{} \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{} \fi \def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small} \DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25} \usepackage{relsize} \RequirePackage{array} \def\@testpach{\@chclass \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@ \else \z@ \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}% \@chnum \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else \z@ \@chclass \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else \if \@nextchar !6 \else \if \@nextchar @7 \else \if \@nextchar (8 \else \if \@nextchar )9 \else 10 \@chnum \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else \if \@nextchar p4 \else \if \@nextchar b5 \else \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi} \gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr} \def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}} \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \def\abbr{} \def\corr{} \def\expan{} \def\gap{} \def\orig{} \def\reg{} \def\ref{} \def\sic{} \def\persName{}\def\name{} \def\placeName{} \def\orgName{} \def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}} \def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}} \def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}} \def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}} \def\textquoted#1{‘#1’} \def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}} \def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}} \def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}} \def\titlem{\itshape} \newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{bibl}{}{} \newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{rubric}{}{} \newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par } \newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}} \newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}} \definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75} \def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}} \DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@} \def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}} \begingroup \catcode`\_=\active \gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}} \endgroup \mathcode`\_=\string"8000 \catcode`\_=12\relax \usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry} \usepackage{framed} \definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95} \usepackage{longtable} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \usepackage{fancyvrb} \usepackage{fancyhdr} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{marginnote} \renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1} \renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize} \def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif} \pagestyle{fancy} \usepackage[pdftitle={Correlation between Radiomorphometric Indexes and Low Bone Quality in the Success of Osseointegration in oral Rehabilitation}, pdfauthor={}]{hyperref} \hyperbaseurl{} \paperwidth210mm \paperheight297mm \def\@pnumwidth{1.55em} \def\@tocrmarg {2.55em} \def\@dotsep{4.5} \setcounter{tocdepth}{3} \clubpenalty=8000 \emergencystretch 3em \hbadness=4000 \hyphenpenalty=400 \pretolerance=750 \tolerance=2000 \vbadness=4000 \widowpenalty=10000 \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}% {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}} \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}% {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large}} \renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}% {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\large}} \renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}% {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\normalsize}} \renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}% {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}% {-1em}% {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}} \def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt} \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par \endgroup} \def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}} \def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}} \def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}} \def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}} \@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{} \@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{} \newif\if@mainmatter \@mainmattertrue \def\chaptername{Chapter} \def\frontmatter{% \pagenumbering{roman} \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section} \def\theHsection{\roman{section}} \def\@chapapp{}% } \def\mainmatter{% \cleardoublepage \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter} \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \pagenumbering{arabic} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6} \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}% \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section} \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}} } \def\backmatter{% \cleardoublepage \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2} \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}% \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}} \appendix } \newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{% \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}% {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}% \leftmargin\labelwidth \advance\leftmargin\labelsep \@openbib@code \usecounter{enumiv}% \let\p@enumiv\@empty \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}% }% \sloppy \clubpenalty4000 \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty \widowpenalty4000% \sfcode`\.\@m}% {\def\@noitemerr {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}% \endlist} \def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}} \parskip0pt \parindent1em \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \newenvironment{reflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{sansreflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{specHead}[2]% {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}% \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}% \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}% \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}% }{} \def\TheFullDate{2019 2019-01-15 (revised: 3 Year 2019 15 January 2019)} \def\TheID{\makeatother } \def\TheDate{2019 2019-01-15} \title{Correlation between Radiomorphometric Indexes and Low Bone Quality in the Success of Osseointegration in oral Rehabilitation} \author{}\makeatletter \makeatletter \newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{% \clearpage \if@twoside \ifodd\c@page \hbox{}\newpage \if@twocolumn \hbox{}\newpage \fi \fi \fi } \makeatother \makeatletter \thispagestyle{empty} \markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author} \renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@ \belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip \abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@ \belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@ \def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@ \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@ \itemsep 1pt} } \makeatother \fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm} \fancyhf{} \setlength{\headheight}{14pt} \fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} \fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} \fancyfoot[RO]{} \fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID} \fancyfoot[LE]{} \fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID} \hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true} \fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}} \date{} \usepackage{authblk} \providecommand{\keywords}[1] { \footnotesize \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1 } \usepackage{graphicx,xcolor} \definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81} \definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9} \definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70} \definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} \renewenvironment{abstract}{% \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space} }{% \vskip8pt \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt } \usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos} \makeatother \usepackage{lineno} \linenumbers \begin{document} \author[1]{Gabriela dos Santos Gonnçalves Lima, Dra. Angelinna Zanesco, Dr. Jose Cassio de Almeida Magalhaes, Dr. Victor Perez Teixeira, Dr. Claudio Costa, Ms. Rodrigo Alves Ribeiro} \affil[1]{ Metropolitan University of Santos} \renewcommand\Authands{ and } \date{\small \em Received: 10 December 2018 Accepted: 2 January 2019 Published: 15 January 2019} \maketitle \begin{abstract} Introduction: Oral rehabilitation through implants has grown significantly in recent years, and with them also come the problems related to implant dentistry, the most important of which is the impossibility of bone tissue to establish osseointegration.Objective: The aim of this study was to correlate radiomorphometric indices and poor bone quality in osseointegration failures in oral rehabilitation.Material and Method: 104 missing implants were evaluated in 74 individuals, verifying in the panoramic radiographs the radiomorphometric indices Mental (IM) and the Mandibular Cortical (ICM). \end{abstract} \keywords{low bone quality, radiomorphometric indexes, implants.} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark} \end{textblock*} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}} \end{textblock*} \let\tabcellsep& \section[{Correlation between Radiomorphometric Indexes and Low Bone Quality in the Success of Osseointegration in oral Rehabilitation}]{Correlation between Radiomorphometric Indexes and Low Bone Quality in the Success of Osseointegration in oral Rehabilitation}\par Abstract-Introduction: Oral rehabilitation through implants has grown significantly in recent years, and with them also come the problems related to implant dentistry, the most important of which is the impossibility of bone tissue to establish osseointegration.\par dental implants depends on osseointegration \hyperref[b3]{2} . With the advancement of success also comes the problems related to implant dentistry \hyperref[b4]{3} .\par Failures can be classified as biological, mechanical or iatrogenic or due to insufficient patient adaptation \hyperref[b5]{4} .\par Among these faults, the most dangerous is the biological fault, which can be defined as the impossibility of bone tissue to establish osseointegration \hyperref[b5]{4,}\hyperref[b6]{5} . This lack of osseointegration that requires implant removal is considered a biological failure \hyperref[b7]{6} .\par Biological faults are classified as primary and secondary. If the failure occurs during the osseointegration process, it is considered a primary failure; if it occurs after charging it is a minor fault \hyperref[b4]{3,}\hyperref[b8]{7} . Primary failures result from lack of bone repair, where the connection between the implant surface and the bone does not occur. Instead, fibrous tissue forms between the implant and bone, causing the implant to lose its stability \hyperref[b6]{5,}\hyperref[b8]{7,}\hyperref[b9]{8} .\par Failures can be prevented by appropriate patient selection; proper treatment planning is critical to successful implant dentistry \hyperref[b10]{9} .\par Some information has been reported on factors that influence implant osseointegration, such as: biocompatibility, implant design, surface conditions, surgical site, a surgical technique for implant installation, and loads applied to them \hyperref[b11]{10} .\par Studies relate early loss in short-length implants in posterior regions where space and volume are insufficient \hyperref[b12]{11} .\par To acquire adequate healing conditions, the implant, after insertion, must exhibit good primary stability, which may correspond to the clinical manifestation of osseointegration. Primary stability is primarily determined by factors related to bone biomechanical properties, implant design, and surgical technique; while secondary stability is also determined by bone tissue response to surgical trauma and implant surface \hyperref[b13]{12} . Primary stability is achieved when the implant locks into the apical or marginal portion of the site due p<0.001 inverse correlation between the MI and the MCI. The lower the value found in the MI, the worse the bone quality evaluated in the MCI. It was also possible to verify the relationship (0.275) to p<0.001 between MI and the arch where it was evaluated that bone quality in the upper arch showed worse quality when compared to the lower arch. It there was correlation to p<0.001 the length of the lost implant and the region (-0.339), smaller length implants were lost in the posterior. Age was correlated (0.198) with the MCI to p<0.05 where the older the age the worse the bone quality evaluated. The MCI correlated with the arch (-0.235) for p<0.05 a worse bone quality when correlated with the implants lost in the upper arch. \section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par ral rehabilitation through implants has been growing significantly in recent years and reaching high rates of clinical success. Currently, bone-implant contact is considered predictable, safe, and lasting 1 . The long-term success of O a sufficient amount of compact bone or cancellous bone \hyperref[b14]{13} .\par The world population has been aging over the years and inevitably, the increase in individuals with low bone density \hyperref[b15]{14} . Several studies have shown a positive correlation between low bone density and implant loss \hyperref[b16]{[15]}\hyperref[b17]{[16]}\hyperref[b18]{[17]}\hyperref[b19]{[18]} . The primary stability of the implant, as well as its survival, is affected by low bone density \hyperref[b16]{15,}\hyperref[b17]{16} . The high rate of implant loss is related to bone type IV when compared to bone type I, II, III \hyperref[b20]{19} .\par The aim of this study was to correlate radiomorphometric indices and poor bone quality in osseointegration failure in oral rehabilitation. \section[{II.}]{II.} \section[{Material and Method}]{Material and Method}\par The project was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP) of the Metropolitan University of Santos and approved. It was used the database of the postgraduate course in implantology of the Metropolitan University of Santos, the data of 104 lost implants of various diameters in 74 individuals aged 33 -84 years of both genders with an average of 59 years, in addition to their images and clinical records. Individuals with a history of hormone replacement therapy or calcium therapy under the age of six months, and those who did not have all the tests necessary for this study were excluded.\par The implants lost in the upper and lower arch in the anterior and posterior regions were separated, also grouped by diameter and length.\par All digital panoramic radiographs images used in this study are from a partner institute of the Metropolitan University of Santos and performed by the ORTHOPHOS XG 3D PAN/TELE/TOMO device (Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) following the same protocol of acquisition: The Panoramic Radiography 69 kV, 15 mA, and exposure time 14.1 s.\par In panoramic radiographs, radiomorphometric indices were evaluated. Among, them the mandibular cortical index (MCI) \hyperref[b21]{20} a bilateral evaluation with results established in: C1 -clear and sharp posterior mandibular cortical, C2 -the endosteal surface presents semilunar defects (lacunar resorption),or the surface presents cortical residues, C3 -a cortical layer is extremely porous (Figure \hyperref[fig_0]{1}). \section[{Results}]{Results}\par We evaluated data from 104 implants of various diameters in 74 individuals, 48 women and 26 men, aged 33 -84 years with a mean of 59.4 years. As for the upper and lower arches, 46 implants lost in the lower arch and 58 in the upper arch. We evaluated 76 implants in the posterior region and 28 in the anterior region. Spearman's correlation coefficient test was performed to assess the relationship between the variables of the lost implants (Table {\ref 1}). \section[{Table 1: Spearman correlation coefficient}]{Table 1: Spearman correlation coefficient}\par According to the result of the correlation coefficient, it was possible to verify the correlation (-0.721) for p<0.001 inverse relationship between the MI and the MCI. The ratio (0.275) to p<0.001 between MI and the arch where bone quality was evaluated in the upper arch showed worse quality when compared to the lower arch.\par It was also correlated (-0.339) to p<0.001 the length of the lost implant and the region, smaller length implants were lost in the posterior region.\par Age was correlated (0.198) with the MCI to p<0.05 where the older, the age the worse, the bone quality evaluated.\par The MCI correlated with the arch (-0.235) for p<0.05 a worse bone quality when correlated with the implants lost in the upper arch.\par IV. \section[{Discussion}]{Discussion}\par The use of radiomorphometric indices to assess bone quality is an effective and inexpensive instrument for this detection since the evaluation test is difficult to access and high for the population.\par Several studies corroborate our results in the high correlation between radiomorphometric indices evaluated in panoramic radiographs, where these exams may be predictive in helping to assess bone quality \hyperref[b25]{[22]}\hyperref[b26]{[23]}\hyperref[b27]{[24]} .\par Some studies contradict these findings showing that there is inconsistency in the data obtained when in smaller groups, although the mandibular cortical index is among the most reproducible radiomorphometric indices \hyperref[b28]{25,}\hyperref[b29]{26} .\par The influence of age with the loss of bone quality was evidenced in this study. Older individuals had worse bone quality when evaluated by the mandibular cortical index. This result was also found in other studies. Zlataric et al. 2002, verified the values of radiomorphometric indices in elderly individuals and showed that the values of these indices decreased in both sexes up to 78 years \hyperref[b30]{27} . Edgerton et al. 1999 evaluated British women and observed that radiomorphometric indices gradually decreased with increasing age \hyperref[b31]{28} .\par When the arches were evaluated, the upper arch showed worse bone quality compared to the lower arch, implants installed in the posterior regions of the upper arch showed a higher loss rate when compared to the other regions.\par It was evidenced in this study when the radiomorphometric indices IM and ICM were evaluated and correlated with the length of the implants and the region where the highest concentration of loss occurred in the posterior maxilla and implants of shorter lengths. These data were also evidenced by other studies where the incidence of loss of short posterior maxillary implants was higher when compared, for example, with the mandible \hyperref[b32]{[29]}\hyperref[b33]{[30]}\hyperref[b34]{[31]} .\par Contrary to the results obtained in this study, implants installed in the posterior maxilla of short length and diameter presented excellent fixation results \hyperref[b35]{32} .\par V. \section[{Conclusion}]{Conclusion}\par According to the results of this study, radiomorphometric indices may be used the preoperative evaluation to assist in the detection of patients with poor bone quality. \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png} \caption{\label{fig_0}Figure 1 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2}\includegraphics[]{image-3.png} \caption{\label{fig_1}Figure 2 :}\end{figure} \footnote{© 2019 Global Journals} \footnote{( )J} \backmatter \begin{bibitemlist}{1} \bibitem[Klemetti]{b21}\label{b21} \textit{}, E Klemetti . \bibitem[Kolmakov]{b22}\label{b22} \textit{}, S Kolmakov . \bibitem[*p< 0,05 and **p< 0]{b0}\label{b0} \textit{*p< 0,05 and **p< 0}, p. 1. \bibitem[Ashley et al. (2003)]{b14}\label{b14} ‘Ailing and failing endosseous dental implants: a literature review’. E T Ashley , L L Covington , B G Bishop , L Breault . \textit{J Contemp Dent Pract} 2003 May 15. 4 (2) p. . \bibitem[Bibliographic References]{b1}\label{b1} \textit{Bibliographic References}, \bibitem[Esposito et al. ()]{b6}\label{b6} ‘Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology’. M Esposito , J M Hirsch , U Lekholm . \textit{Eur J Oral Sci} 1998. 106 p. . \bibitem[Machtei et al. (2008)]{b33}\label{b33} ‘Dental implants placed in previously failed sites: survival rate and factors affecting the outcome’. E E Machtei , D Mahler , O Oettinger-Barak , O Zuabi , J Horwitz . \textit{Clin Oral Implants Res} 2008 Mar. 19 (3) p. . \bibitem[Akay et al. (2019)]{b29}\label{b29} ‘Does tooth loss in the mandibular posterior region have an effect on the mental index and panoramic mandibular index?’. G Akay , Z Akarslan , O Karadag , K Gungor . \textit{Eur Oral Res} 2019 May. 53 (2) p. . \bibitem[Baqain et al. (2012)]{b12}\label{b12} ‘Early dental implant failure: risk factors’. Z H Baqain , W Y Moqbel , F A Sawair . \textit{Br J Oral MaxillofacSurg} 2012 Apr. 50 (3) p. . \bibitem[Miliuniene et al. ()]{b25}\label{b25} ‘Evaluation of bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with alterations of the mandible cortical bone’. E Miliuniene , V Alekna , V Peciuliene , M Tamulaitiene . \textit{Stomatologija} 2016. 18 (3) p. . \bibitem[Esposito et al. ()]{b9}\label{b9} ‘Histopathologic observations on early oral implant failures’. M Esposito , P Thomsen , L E Ericson . \textit{Int J Oral Max-illofac Implants} 1999. 14 p. . \bibitem[Alsaadi et al. ()]{b8}\label{b8} ‘Impact of local and systemic factors on the incidence of failures up to abutment connection with modified surface oral im-plants’. G Alsaadi , M Quirynen , K Michiles . \textit{J Clin Periodontol} 2008. 35 p. . \bibitem[Misch et al. ()]{b7}\label{b7} ‘Implant success, survival, and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference’. C E Misch , M L Perel , H L Wang . \textit{Implant Dent} 2008. 17 p. . \bibitem[Niedermeier et al. ()]{b18}\label{b18} ‘Implant-supported immediately loaded fixed full-arch dentures: evaluation of implant survival rates in a case cohort of up to 7 years’. R Niedermeier , F Stelzle , M Riemann , W Bolz , P Schuh , H Wachtel . \textit{Clin Implant Dent Relat Res} 2017. 19 p. . \bibitem[Olate et al. (2010)]{b32}\label{b32} ‘Influence of diameter and length of implant on early dental implant failure’. S Olate , M C Lyrio , M De Moraes , R Mazzonetto , R W Moreira . \textit{J Oral Maxillofac Surg} 2010 Feb. 68 (2) p. . \bibitem[Moriwaki et al. (2016)]{b35}\label{b35} ‘Influence of Implant Length and Diameter, Bicortical Anchorage, and Sinus Augmentation on Bone Stress Distribution: Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis’. H Moriwaki , S Yamaguchi , T Nakano , Y Yamanishi , S Imazato , H Yatani . \textit{Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants} 2016 Jul-Aug. 31 (4) p. . \bibitem[Sennerby and Miyamoto ()]{b13}\label{b13} ‘Insertion torque and RFA analysis of Tiunite and SLA implants. A study in the rabbit’. L Sennerby , I Miyamoto . \textit{Appl Osseointegration Res} 2000. 1 (1) p. . \bibitem[Smith ()]{b10}\label{b10} ‘Long-term complications of osseointegrated implants’. R Smith . \textit{Complications in oral and maxillofacial surgery}, B L Kaban, M A Progrel, H Perrot (ed.) (Philadelphia: Saunders) 1997. \bibitem[Busenlechner et al. ()]{b17}\label{b17} ‘Long-term implant success at the Academy for Oral Implantology: 8-year followup and risk factor analysis’. D Busenlechner , R Fürhauser , R Haas , G Watzek , G Mailath , B Pommer . \textit{J Periodontal Implant Sci} 2014. 44 p. . \bibitem[Buser et al. ()]{b5}\label{b5} ‘Longterm evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multicenter study with 2359 implants’. D Buser , R Mericske-Stern , J P Bernard . \textit{Clin Oral Implants Res} 1997. 8 p. . \bibitem[Becker et al. ()]{b19}\label{b19} ‘Osteoporosis and implant failure: an exploratory case control study’. W Becker , P P Hujoel , B E Becker , H Willingham . \textit{J Periodontol} 2000. 71 p. . \bibitem[Reginster and Burlet ()]{b15}\label{b15} ‘Osteoporosis: a still increasing prevalence’. J Y Reginster , N Burlet . \textit{Bone} 2006. 38 p. . \bibitem[Mansour et al. (2013)]{b28}\label{b28} ‘Panoramic radiomorphometric indices as reliable parameters in predicting osteoporosis’. S Mansour , A S Alghamdi , F Javed , H Marzouk , E A Khan . \textit{Am J Med Sci} 2013 Dec. 346 (6) p. . \bibitem[Drozdzowska et al. ()]{b27}\label{b27} ‘Panoramic-based mandibular indices in relation to mandibular bone mineral density and skeletal status assessed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and quantitative ultrasound’. B Drozdzowska , W Pluskiewicz , B Tarnawska . \textit{Dentomaxillofac Radiol} 2002. 31 p. . \bibitem[Kröger ()]{b23}\label{b23} ‘Pantomography in assessment of the osteoporosis risk group’. H Kröger . \textit{Scand. J. Dent. Res} 1994. 102 p. . \bibitem[Lekholm and Zarb ()]{b20}\label{b20} \textit{Patient selection and preparation. Tissue integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry}, U Lekholm , G A Zarb . 1985. Chicago: Quintessence Pub Co. p. . \bibitem[Dutra et al. ()]{b26}\label{b26} \textit{Radiomorphometric indices and their relation to gender, age, and dental status. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod}, V Dutra , J Yang , H Devlin , C Susin . 2005. 99 p. . \bibitem[Ledgerton et al. ()]{b31}\label{b31} ‘Radiomorphometric indices of the mandible in a British female population’. D Ledgerton , K Horner , H Devlin , H Worthington . \textit{Dentomaxillofac Radiol} 1999. 28 p. . \bibitem[Zlataric et al. ()]{b30}\label{b30} ‘Relationship between body mass index and local quality of mandibular bone structure in elderly individuals’. ' D K Zlataric , ' A Celebic , P Kobler . \textit{J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci} 2002. 57 p. . \bibitem[Givol et al. ()]{b4}\label{b4} ‘Risk management aspects of implant dentistry’. N Givol , S Taicher , T Halamish-Shani , G Chaushu . \textit{Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants} 2002. 17 (2) p. . \bibitem[Åstrand et al. ()]{b16}\label{b16} ‘Tapered implants in jaws with soft bone quality: a clinical and radiographie 1-year study of the Brånemark System Mark IV fixture’. P Åstrand , C Billström , H Feldmann , K Fischer , V Henricsson , B Johansson . \textit{Clin Implant Dent Relat Res} 2003. 5 p. . \bibitem[Alsaadi et al. ()]{b34}\label{b34} ‘The importance of implant surface characteristics in the replacement of failed implants’. G Alsaadi , M Quirynen , D Van Steenberghe . \textit{The International Journal of Oral \& Maxillofacial Implants} 2006. 21 p. . \bibitem[Albrektsson et al. ()]{b11}\label{b11} ‘The longterm efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success’. T Albrektsson , G Zarb , P Worthington , A R Eriksson . \textit{Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants} 1986. 1 (1) p. . \bibitem[Brånemark et al. ()]{b2}\label{b2} \textit{Tissue integrated prosthesis: osseointegration in clinical dentistry}, P I Brånemark , G A Zarb , T Albrektsson . 1985. Chicago: Quintessence. \bibitem[Taguchi et al. (1995)]{b24}\label{b24} \textit{Tooth loss and mandibular osteopenia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod}, A Taguchi , K Tanimoto , Y Suei , T Wada . 1995 Jan. 79 p. . \bibitem[Matos ()]{b3}\label{b3} \textit{Tratamento de superfície de implantes dentários e osseointegração. Rev Dental Press Periodontia Implantol}, Grm Matos . 2008. 2 p. . (out-dez) \end{bibitemlist} \end{document}