ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Evaluation of the implant diameter on the initial-stability of narrow- and standard-diameter implants placed in simulated Type-I and Type-IV bone-blocks.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Optimizing Dental Implant Success: Biomechanical Insights, Computer-Guided Precision and The Role of Open Guide Systems in Achieving Cost-Effective and Accessible Treatment.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- A resonance frequency analysis to investigate the impact of implant size on primary and secondary stability.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
- Clinical observation of Porcine Collagen Membrane + artificial Bovine Bone Granules Guided tissue regeneration combined with Autologous CGF in the treatment of severe periodontitis bone defect.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA comparison of the initial stability of narrow- and standard-diameter implants (SDIs) placed in Type-I and Type-IV bone-blocks is not yet reported. The aim was to evaluate in-vitro the influence of implant diameter on the initial stability of narrow- and standard-diameter implants (SDIs) placed in simulated Type-I and Type-IV bone-blocks.
methodsThe present experimental in-vitro study was performed between July and September 2020 at the Specialist Dental Practice, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Narrow- and standard-diameter implants were placed 3-mm apart in simulated soft (Type-IV) and dense (Type-I) bone blocks by a trained and calibrated investigator. In groups A (Type-IV bone blocks) and B (Type-I bone blocks), implants were inserted using an insertion-torque and drilling-speed of 15-30 Ncm and 1000-1500 rpm, respectively with the implant collar at the crest of simulated bone blocks. In all samples, initial-stability was recorded using resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Sample-size estimation was done and group-comparisons were carried out. A P-value of 0.01 or less reflected statistical significance.
resultsIn Groups-A and -B, 44 (22 NDIs and 22 SDIs) and 44 (22 NDIs and 22 SDIs) were placed. In group-A, the mean RFA values for NDIs and SDIs were 68.5 ± 3.5 and 69.1 ± 2.4, respectively. In Group-B, the mean RFA values for NDIs and SDIs were 78.06 ± 9.6 and 75.3 ± 5.2. RFA values among NDIs and SDIs in groups A and B were similar.
conclusionThe NDIs and SDIs show comparable initial-stability when positioned in simulated Type-I and Type-IV bone blocks.
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.