ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2018
Influence of short implants geometry on primary stability.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2018. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of 6-mm and 11-mm dental implants in the posterior region supporting fixed dental prostheses: 5-year results of an open multicenter randomized controlled trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2021Trial
- Article
- Clinical Performance of Short Expandable Dental Implants for Oral Rehabilitation in Highly Atrophic Alveolar Bone: 3-year Results of a Prospective Single-Center Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA correct design is needed in short implants to improve primary stability (PS) in low quality bone. This study aimed to compare PS of double thread and single thread short implants. MATERIAL AND
methodsThirty implants with single thread design (PHI/SHORT-I) and 30 implants with double thread design (PHIA/SHORT-I) (Radhex®, Inmet-Garnick S.A., Guadalajara, Spain) were placed in 30 randomly selected bovine ribs. PS was assessed in implant stability quotients (ISQ) and periotest values (PV) with Osstell™ and Periotest® devices, respectively. Computed tomographies of the ribs were taken and bone quality was evaluated in Hounsfield Units (HU) using Ez3D Plus software (Vatech Co., Korea). Only implants placed in low quality bone according to Misch and Kircos classification were selected (D3 bone: 350-850 HU; and D4 bone: 150-350 HU). Ten implants were not included in the study for being placed in D1 and D2 bone. Finally, 50 implants were selected: 17 and 9 PHI/SHORT-I in D3 and D4 bone respectively, and 15 and 9 PHIA/SHORT-I in D3 and D4 bone respectively.
resultsThe one-way ANOVA showed statistically significant differences in ISQ (61.35 ± 4.77 in PHI/SHORT-I and 66.43 ± 4.49 in PHIA/SHORT-I, P<0.005) and PV (-2.76 ± 0.8 and -4.11 ± 1.24 respectively, P<0.005) between two implant designs in D3 bone, and statistically significant differences in ISQ (53.44 ± 3.34 in PHI/SHORT-I and 60.56 ± 1.53 in PHIA/SHORT-I, P<0.0001) and PV (1.13 ± 0.95 and -2.5 ± 0.61 respectively, P<0.0001) between two groups in D4 bone.
conclusionsDouble thread design short implants resulted to have higher PS in comparison with single thread design short implants in D3 and D4 bone.
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.