Martin Koller

Dr. Martin Koller

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 February 2014 in Clinical Oral Implants Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MPMichael Payer
Michael Payer
AHAlexander Heschl
Alexander Heschl
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
GAGerwin Arnetzl
Gerwin Arnetzl
MLMartin Lorenzoni
Martin Lorenzoni
NJNorbert Jakse
Norbert Jakse

15 January 2020 in Clinical Oral Implants Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
ESElisabeth Steyer
Elisabeth Steyer
KTKerstin Theisen
Kerstin Theisen
SSSami Stagnell
Sami Stagnell
NJNorbert Jakse
Norbert Jakse
MPMichael Payer
Michael Payer
Objectives: To prospectively evaluate, as part of an ongoing randomized pilot trial, the clinical outcomes of two‐piece zirconia implants in comparison with titanium implants 80 months after delivery of all‐ceramic (lithium disilicate) single‐tooth restorations.Material and methods: The original sample included 31 (16 zirconia and 15 titanium) implants in 22 healthy patients. In addition to evaluating implant survival and success, a number of clinical or radiographic parameters were statistically analyzed: plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), pink esthetic score (PES), and marginal bone loss (MBL). Both implant groups were compared using a Mann–Whitney U test.Results: Three implants (2 zirconia and 1 titanium) had been lost, so that 28 implants (14 zirconia and 14 titanium) in 21 patients could be evaluated after a mean of 80.9 (SD: 5.5) months. All surviving implants had remained stable, in the absence of any fixture or abutment fractures and without any chipping, fracture, or debonding of crowns. The zirconia implants were associated with PI values of 11.07% (SD: 8.11) and the titanium implants with 15.20% (SD: 15.58), the respective figures for the other parameters being 16.43% (SD: 6.16) or 12.60% (SD: 7.66) for BOP; 11.11 (SD: 1.27) or 11.56 (SD: 1.01) for PES; and 1.38 mm (SD: 0.81) or 1.17 mm (SD: 0.73) for MBL.Conclusions: No significant differences were found between the clinical outcomes of two‐piece zirconia and titanium implants based on the aforementioned parameters after 80 months of clinical service. Our results should be interpreted with the limited sample size in mind.

9 November 2021 in Materials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ESElisabeth Steyer
Elisabeth Steyer
Valentin HerberValentin Herber
Valentin Herber
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
Daniel VeghDaniel Vegh
Daniel Vegh
KMKhaled Mukaddam
Khaled Mukaddam
MPMichael Payer
Michael Payer
Objectives: The aim of this prospective case series was to evaluate single-piece zirconia implants restored with lithium disilicate CAD/CAM crowns through a long-term follow-up. Methods: In this trial, 20 one-piece zirconia implants were placed in 20 patients. Implants were restored (i) immediately with lithium disilicate CAD/CAM provisionals, and (ii) permanently four months after surgery. Patients were followed for 11 years. Clinical parameters and radiological measurements of the zirconia implants were assessed. For the statistical analysis, paired t-test was applied. Results: Four implants were counted as implant failure due to the loss of implant stability, resulting in a Kaplan–Meier survival rate of 80% up to 11 years. The mean bleeding on probing values were 19.1% (SD ± 13.1) and 18.2% (SD ± 17.6) 96 and 11 years after implant placement, respectively. The plaque index revealed a significant decrease over time (p < 0.001) with a value between 25.9% (SD ± 5.7) and 12.6% (SD ± 10.0) at baseline and 11-years follow-up respectively. The marginal bone level revealed a significant decrease 4, 8, and 11 years after implant insertion (p = 0.001, p = 0.019, and p = 0.027, respectively). Conclusions: Immediately loaded zirconia single-piece implants showed a suitable success rate in clinical and radiographic outcomes.

1 January 2012
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
GAG V Arnetzl
G V Arnetzl
LHL Holly
L Holly

20 October 2011 in Journal of Visualized Experiments
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BKBarbara Klug
Barbara Klug
CRClaudia Rodler
Claudia Rodler
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
GWGernot Wimmer
Gernot Wimmer
HKHarald H. Kessler
Harald H. Kessler
ESElisabeth Santigli
Elisabeth Santigli
Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) of natural heterogeneous biofilm is today facilitated by a comprehensive range of staining techniques, one of them being fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).1,2 We performed a pilot study in which oral biofilm samples collected from fixed orthodontic appliances (palatal expanders) were stained by FISH, the objective being to assess the three-dimensional organization of natural biofilm and plaque accumulation.3,4 FISH creates an opportunity to stain cells in their native biofilm environment by the use of fluorescently labeled 16S rRNA-targeting probes.4-7,19 Compared to alternative techniques like immunofluorescent labeling, this is an inexpensive, precise and straightforward labeling technique to investigate different bacterial groups in mixed biofilm consortia.18,20 General probes were used that bind to Eubacteria (EUB338 + EUB338II + EUB338III; hereafter EUBmix),8-10 Firmicutes (LGC354 A-C; hereafter LGCmix),9,10 and Bacteroidetes (Bac303).11 In addition, specific probes binding to Streptococcus mutans (MUT590)12,13 and Porphyromonas gingivalis (POGI)13,14 were used. The extreme hardness of the surface materials involved (stainless steel and acrylic resin) compelled us to find new ways of preparing the biofilm. As these surface materials could not be readily cut with a cryotome, various sampling methods were explored to obtain intact oral biofilm. The most workable of these approaches is presented in this communication. Small flakes of the biofilm-carrying acrylic resin were scraped off with a sterile scalpel, taking care not to damage the biofilm structure. Forceps were used to collect biofilm from the steel surfaces. Once collected, the samples were fixed and placed directly on polysine coated glass slides. FISH was performed directly on these slides with the probes mentioned above. Various FISH protocols were combined and modified to create a new protocol that was easy to handle.5,10,14,15 Subsequently the samples were analyzed by confocal laser scanning microscopy. Well-known configurations3,4,16,17 could be visualized, including mushroom-style formations and clusters of coccoid bacteria pervaded by channels. In addition, the bacterial composition of these typical biofilm structures were analyzed and 2D and 3D images created.

1 October 2010 in Stomatologie
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MKMartin Koller
Martin Koller
GAGerwin V. Arnetzl
Gerwin V. Arnetzl