ArticleLasers in medical science2013
Reliability evaluation of alumina-blasted/acid-etched versus laser-sintered dental implants.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability and failure modes of narrow implant systems.Clinical oral investigations · 2016Article
- Immediate, non-submerged, root-analogue direct laser metal sintering (DLMS) implants: a 1-year prospective study on 15 patients.Lasers in medical science · 2014Article
- Direct metal laser sintering titanium dental implants: a review of the current literature.International journal of biomaterials · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Step-stress accelerated life testing (SSALT) and fractographic analysis were performed to evaluate the reliability and failure modes of dental implant fabricated by machining (surface treated with alumina blasting/acid etching) or laser sintering for anterior single-unit replacements. Forty-two dental implants (3.75 × 10 mm) were divided in two groups (n=21 each): laser sintered (LS) and alumina blasting/acid etching (AB/AE). The abutments were screwed to the implants and standardized maxillary central incisor metallic crowns were cemented and subjected to SSALT in water. Use-level probability Weibull curves and reliability for a mission of 50,000 cycles at 200 N were calculated. Polarized light and scanning electron microscopes were used for failure analyses. The Beta (β) value derived from use-level probability Weibull calculation of 1.48 for group AB/AE indicated that damage accumulation likely was an accelerating factor, whereas the β of 0.78 for group LS indicated that load alone likely dictated the failure mechanism for this group, and that fatigue damage did not appear to accumulate. The reliability was not significantly different (p>0.9) between AB/AE (61 %) and LS (62 %). Fracture of the abutment and fixation screw was the chief failure mode. No implant fractures were observed. No differences in reliability and fracture mode were observed between LS and AB/AE implants used for anterior single-unit crowns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22843309What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.