SynthesisPloS one2019
Longevity and marginal bone loss of narrow-diameter implants supporting single crowns: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of mini-implant-retained maxillary and mandibular overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of narrow- and regular-diameter implants with bone augmentation in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Pooled it
- Narrow Versus Standard Diameter Implants for Supporting Single Crown Restorations in the Posterior Jaw: A Randomised Controlled Trial.International dental journal · 2025Trial
- Influence of intermediate abutment height and timing of placement on marginal bone loss in single implant-supported crowns: a 12-month follow-up randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Trial
- Externally connected simple taper retention implants in narrow anterior alveolar ridges: 5-7-year follow-up cohort study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Retrospective Study of Functional and Esthetic Outcomes Using Narrow-Diameter Implants for Single Upper Central Incisor Replacements.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Long-term clinical study of fixed prosthetic rehabilitation using one-piece narrow-diameter implants: a retrospective study.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2024Article
- Review
- Mineralization and morphology of peri-implant bone around loaded and unloaded dental implants retrieved from the human mandible.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the clinical safety and performance of a narrow diameter (2.9 mm) bone-level implant: a 1-year prospective single-arm multicenter study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2023Article
- Does the Number of Dental Implants Affect Marginal Bone Loss in the Posterior Mandible?Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2022Article
- One-year performance of posterior narrow diameter implants in hyperglycemic and normo-glycemic patients-a pilot study.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Article
- Assessment of Peri-Implant Soft Tissues Conditions around Short and Ultra-Short Implant-Supported Single Crowns: A 3-Year Retrospective Study on Periodontally Healthy Patients and Patients with a History of Periodontal Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the longevity and marginal bone loss of narrow-diameter (≤3.3-mm) versus standard-diameter implants supporting single crowns. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, and SciELO databases were searched for relevant publications. In addition, the scientific references provided by each of the implant companies that appeared in the search were reviewed. Intervention studies comparing longevity and bone loss between narrow-diameter and standard-diameter implants were included.
resultsThe search was limited to in vivo studies in humans. The query returned 1931 results, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. The implant success rate ranged from 93.8% to 100% over a maximum follow-up of 3 years, with no difference between narrow- and standard-diameter implants. Meta-analysis of all included studies showed greater bone loss in narrow-diameter implants as compared with standard ones; however, when analysis was restricted to randomized trials, no such difference was present.
conclusionThe meta-analysis showed no difference in longevity between narrow implants and standard implants when supporting single crowns. However, narrow-diameter implants may be associated with greater marginal bone loss. These findings should be regarded cautiously due to the short follow-up duration and methodological heterogeneity of the primary studies.
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.