One hundred crossbred beef steers were used in two experiments to evaluate effects of growth implants on performance. Steers were implanted either at 3.5 months and weaning (CALF); at weaning (WEAN); or not implanted (NONE). In Experiment 1 implanted steers weighed more at weaning (P = 0.01), and had a higher ADG for the entire trial compared to non-implanted steers (P = 0.03). In Experiment 2, at 80 d post wean, implanted steers outweighed NONE (P = 0.09). Overall ADG (P = 0.01) was greater for cattle that were implanted. In the feedlot the CALF group had the lowest ADG (P = 0.01), and final BW (P = 0.07). At harvest CALF had the highest dressing percentage (P = 0.04), smallest LMA (P = 0.1), and lowest IMF (P = 0.06). Implants can increase productivity in beef cattle however, marketing and management strategy will dictate use.

Purpose The present review aimed to evaluate the difference of dental implant failure rates and marginal bone loss (MBL) between implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets or healed sites.   Materials and methods Electronic search was undertaken in three databases, plus manual search of journals, including studies randomized or not. Meta-analyses were performed besides meta-regressions, in order to verify how the odds ratio (OR) and MBL were associated with follow-up time.   Results The review included 163 publications. Altogether, there were 17,278 and 38,738 implants placed in fresh extraction sockets and healed sites, respectively. Pairwise meta-analyses showed that implants in sockets had a higher failure risk in comparison to healed sites: OR 1.349, all studies included; OR 2.070, only prospective non-RCTs; OR 2.487, only RCTs (all p < 0.001). The difference in implant failure between the groups was statistically significant in the maxilla (OR 1.616, p = 0.029), but not in the mandible (OR 2.192, p = 0.075). The MBL mean difference (MD) between the groups was -0.053 mm, although not statistically significant (p = 0.089). There was an estimated decrease of 0.003 in OR (p = 0.284; not statistically significant) and increase of 0.006 mm (p = 0.036) in the MBL MD between groups for every additional month of follow-up.   Conclusion In conclusion, implants placed in fresh extraction sockets present higher risk of failure than implants placed in healed sites. / Syfte Granskningen syftade på att utvärdera skillnaden i misslyckandefrekvensen av dentala implantat och marginalbenförlust (MBL) mellan implantat installerade i ny extraktionsalveol jämfört med läkt områden.   Material och metod Elektronisk sökning gjordes i tre databaser, plus manuell sökning av journaler, inklusive studier som var randomiserade eller ej. Metaanalyser utfördes, förutom metaregressioner, för att verifiera hur oddskvoten (OR) och MBL var associerade med uppföljningstid.   Resultat Granskningen inkluderade 163 publikationer. Sammanlagt fanns det 17,278 och 38,738 implantat placerade i ny extraktionsalveol respektive läkt områden. Parvisa metaanalyser visade att implantat i en ny extraktionsalveol hade en högre risk att misslyckas jämfört med läkt områden. OR 1,349 alla studier inkluderade; OR 2.070, endast prospektiv icke-RCTs, OR 2.487, endast RCTs (alla p < 0.001). Skillnaden i implantatens misslyckandefrekvens mellan gruppen var statistiskt signifikant i maxillan (OR 1.616, p = 0.029), men inte i mandibeln (OR 2.192, p = 0.075). MBL medelskillnaden mellan grupperna var -0,053 mm, och var inte statistiskt signifikant (p = 0.089). Det var en uppskattad minskning med 0.0003 i OR (p = 0.284; inte statistiskt signifikant) och en ökning av 0.006 mm (p = 0.036) i MBL medelskillnaden mellan grupperna för varje ytterligare månad av uppföljning.   Slutsats Slutsatsen blev att implantat som placerades i en ny extraktionsalveol innebar högre risk för misslyckanden än implantat placerade i läkt områden.

Reproduction de : Thèse d'exercice : Chirurgie dentaire : Nantes : 2009. / Bibliogr.

Thesis (PhDSurfaceScience)--University of South Australia, 2004.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Toronto, 1998. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Toronto, 1998. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toronto, 1997. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Iowa, 1999. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.