Table 3.
Patient demographics with respect to implants
| Overall | Subgroup* | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Platform switching | Platform matching | |||||
| Total Implants, n | 285 | 203* | 68* | |||
| Number of implants placed per patient, n (%) | ||||||
| 1 | 125 (63.8) | 97 (67.4) | 20 (48.8) | |||
| 2 | 56 (28.6) | 37 (25.7) | 16 (39.0) | |||
| 3 | 12 (6.1) | 7 (4.9) | 5 (12.2) | |||
| 4 | 3 (1.5) | 3 (2.1) | 0 (0.0) | |||
| Implant position distribution, n | ||||||
| Maxilla | ||||||
| 17 | 3 | 2 | 1 | |||
| 16 | 16 | 10 | 4 | |||
| 15 | 14 | 8 | 5 | |||
| 14 | 9 | 8 | 0 | |||
| 13 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| 12 | 11 | 10 | 1 | |||
| 11 | 8 | 7 | 1 | |||
| 21 | 11 | 10 | 1 | |||
| 22 | 7 | 6 | 1 | |||
| 23 | 8 | 8 | 0 | |||
| 24 | 11 | 8 | 2 | |||
| 25 | 11 | 7 | 3 | |||
| 26 | 15 | 12 | 2 | |||
| 27 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |||
| Mandible | ||||||
| 47 | 12 | 8 | 4 | |||
| 46 | 44 | 31 | 10 | |||
| 45 | 13 | 9 | 3 | |||
| 44 | 9 | 7 | 2 | |||
| 43 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
| 42 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| 41 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 31 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| 32 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 34 | 4 | 1 | 3 | |||
| 35 | 14 | 9 | 4 | |||
| 36 | 47 | 33 | 13 | |||
| 37 | 12 | 5 | 6 | |||
| Diameter | Length of implant | Total | ||||
| 9 mm | 11 mm | 13 mm | 16 mm | Total, n | Total, % | |
| 3.3 mm | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.4 |
| 3.8 mm | 10 | 29 | 54 | 1 | 94 | 33.0 |
| 4.3 mm | 15 | 43 | 50 | 2 | 110 | 38.6 |
| 5.0 mm | 7 | 35 | 36 | 1 | 79 | 27.7 |
| 6.0 mm | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.4 |
| Total n | 32 | 109 | 140 | 4 | 285 | 100.0 |
*Eleven patients with 14 implants were not loaded/restored with abutments due to early implant failures or because the patients were lost to follow-up (Fig. 1)