Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34430506›Full record

ArticleJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry

Effects of the Healing Chambers in Implant Macrogeometry Design in a Low-Density Bone Using Conventional and Undersized Drilling.

Sergio A Gehrke, Antônio Scarano, José H C de Lima, Marco A Bianchini, Berenice A Dedavid, Piedad N De Aza

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Influence of Implant Macro-geometry in Primary Stability in Low-Density Bone: AnJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Sergio A GehrkeDepartment of Research, Biotecnos, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Antônio ScaranoDepartment of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
José H C de LimaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Marco A BianchiniPost-Graduate Program in Implant Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
Berenice A DedavidDepartment of Materials Engineering, Pontificia Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Piedad N De AzaInstituto de Bioingenieria, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Elche (Alicante), Spain.
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul · BRUniversidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia · ESUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina · BRUniversidade Federal Fluminense · BRUniversitat de Miguel Hernández d'Elx · ESUniversity of Chieti-Pescara · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ideal installation technique or implant macrogeometry for obtaining an adequate osseointegration in low-density bone tissue follows a challenge in the implantology. AIMS AND

objectiveThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the behavior of three osteotomy techniques and two implant macrogeometries in two low-density polyurethane blocks. The insertion torque (IT), initial stability, pullout resistance, and weight of the residual bone material deposited on the implants were assessed. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 120 implants with two different macrogeometries were used. They were divided into six groups according to the implant macrogeometry and the drilling technique performed (

resultsDifferences were found in the values referring to the macrogeometry of the implants and the type of osteotomy performed. In all groups, the initial stability of the PCF 10 blocks was quite low. The undersized osteotomies significantly increased the values measured in all tests in the PCF 20 density blocks.

conclusionsIn conclusion, even when a modified (undersized) osteotomy technique is used, implants inserted in low-quality bone (type IV) can present problems for osseointegration due their low initial stability and bone resistance. However, the modification in the implant macrogeometry (with healing chambers) presented more quantity of bone on the surface after the pullout test.

Indexed as

Implant macrogeometryinitial implant stabilityinsertion torquelow-density bonepullout resistancesurgical technique

Identifiers

PMID34430506
PMCPMC8352059
OpenAlexW3187772241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.