ArticleClinical oral investigations2016
Reliability and failure modes of narrow implant systems.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structure-Property-Function Evaluation of a β-Type Ti-Nb-Zr Alloy for Dental Implant Applications with Short-Term Clinical Validation.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- The Comparison of Survival Rates between Narrow Diameter Implants and Standard Diameter Implants: An Updated Meta-analysis.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2023Article
- Biomechanical Behavior of Narrow Dental Implants Made with Aluminum- and Vanadium-Free Alloys: A Finite Element Analysis.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Implants Presenting Different Diameters: Extra-Narrow, Narrow and Conventional.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNarrow implants are indicated in areas of limited bone width or when grafting is nonviable. However, the reduction of implant diameter may compromise their performance. This study evaluated the reliability of several narrow implant systems under fatigue, after restored with single-unit crowns. MATERIALS AND
methodsNarrow implant systems were divided (n = 18 each), as follows: Astra (ASC); BioHorizons (BSC); Straumann Roxolid (SNC), Intra-Lock (IMC), and Intra-Lock one-piece abutment (ILO). Maxillary central incisor crowns were cemented and subjected to step-stress accelerated life testing in water. Use level probability Weibull curves and reliability for a mission of 100,000 cycles at 130- and 180-N loads (90 % two-sided confidence intervals) were calculated. Scanning electron microscopy was used for fractography.
resultsReliability for 100,000 cycles at 130 N was ∼99 % in group ASC, ∼99 % in BSC, ∼96 % in SNC, ∼99 % in IMC, and ∼100 % in ILO. At 180 N, reliability of ∼34 % resulted for the ASC group, ∼91 % for BSC, ∼53 % for SNC, ∼70 % for IMC, and ∼99 % for ILO. Abutment screw fracture was the main failure mode for all groups.
conclusionsReliability was not different between systems for 100,000 cycles at the 130-N load. A significant decrease was observed at the 180-N load for ASC, SNC, and IMC, whereas it was maintained for BSC and ILO. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The investigated narrow implants presented mechanical performance under fatigue that suggests their safe use as single crowns in the anterior region.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.