SynthesisInternational journal of implant dentistry2021
Comparison of general and aesthetic effects between flapless and flap techniques in dental implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International journal of implant dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of flapless and flapped implantations on soft tissue: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of topical application of atorvastatin gel versus hyaluronic acid on immediate loading dental implant in posterior maxilla: a randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of Flapless Static Computer-Aided Implant Surgery in Post-Oncological Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Study of Peri-Implant Tissues Following Flapless Placement of a One-Piece Tissue-Level Implant Versus Open-Flap Placement of a Two-Piece Bone-Level Implant in a Canine Model.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- The low invasiveness design (LID) flap in immediate implant placement: a 20-patient case series on a novel flap design based on new insights into papilla vascularization.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Soft tissue healing in flapless versus conventional flap implant placement: A longitudinal study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Evaluation of clinical and serological responses after full-mouth implantation in single-visit versus multiple-session surgery.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2024Article
- Clinical Observation of Flapless Implantation in the Posterior Tooth Area under the Guidance of the Fully Guided Template.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Hard- and Soft-tissue Changes in Immediate Implant Placement Using Flapless Approach with and without Demineralized Freeze-dried Bone Allograft Clinically and Radiographically Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography.Contemporary clinical dentistryArticle
- Clinical and radiographic evaluation of soft and hard tissue changes following flap and flapless implant surgery: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyArticle
- A Comprehensive Analysis of Flapless and Conventional Flap Technique in Dental Implant Surgery - A Comparative Study.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformation about the aesthetic effects of flapless in implant surgeries is scant. Differences of the survival rate (SR) and crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two techniques were also controversial. Thus, this review was aimed to compare the general and aesthetic effects of flapless and flap approaches in implant surgeries. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing the principals of PRISMA, literature databases were searched for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical performances of flap and flapless techniques. After that, relevant data of selected studies were pooled and analyzed to compare SR, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), visual analogue scale (VAS), papillae presentation index (PPI), keratinized mucosa (KM) width and CBL between the two techniques.
resultsFourteen RCTs were included. No significant difference was found in SR (RR = - 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) (- 0.05, 0.04)), BOP (OR = 0.40, 95% CI (0.15, 1.02)), KM width (WMD = - 0.42, 95% CI (- 1.02, 0.17)) between two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that the difference of CBL was insignificant in two groups (WMD = - 0.13, 95% CI (- 0.63, 0.38)). However, flap techniques would lead more peri-implant PD (WMD = - 0.37, 95% CI (- 0.51, - 0.23)). Subgroup analysis also indicated lower VAS scores in flapless group after 1 day (WMD = - 1.66, 95% CI (- 2.16, - 1.16)) but comparable pain experience after 3 days (WMD = - 0.59, 95% CI (- 1.33, 0.16)). Mean difference of PPI (WMD = 0.32, 95% CI (0.28, 0.35)) between the two groups was significant.
conclusionsThe flapless procedure showed a superiority in preserving gingival papillae, reducing postoperative pain and peri-implant PD compared to the flap procedure, while exhibiting comparable effects on SR, BOP, KW width changes and CBL. Flapless technique is more recommended at the ideal soft and hard tissue implanting sites.
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.