ArticleClinical oral investigations2022
Success of dental implants in patients with large bone defect and analysis of risk factors for implant failure: a non-randomized retrospective cohort study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short implants compared to regular dental implants after bone augmentation in the atrophic posterior mandible: umbrella review and meta-analysis of success outcomes.International journal of implant dentistry · 2023Pooled it
- Bone Defect Treatment in Regenerative Medicine: Exploring Natural and Synthetic Bone Substitutes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Biomechanical evaluation of implant options for unilateral maxillary defects: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Mechanical Factors Implicated in Zirconia Implant Fracture Placed within the Anterior Region-A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to retrospectively investigate the success and survival rates of dental implants used for dentomaxillary prostheses at our hospital and the risk factors associated with large bone defects. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 138 external joint system implants used for dentomaxillary prostheses in 40 patients with large bone defects were included in this study. The alveolar bone at the site of implant insertion was evaluated using panoramic radiography and computed tomography. Various risk factors (demographic characteristics, dental status, and operative factors such as the employment of alveolar bone augmentation, the site, the length, and diameter of implants) for implant failure and complete implant loss were investigated using univariate and multivariate analyses. The associations between the variables and the success and survival rates of dental implants were analyzed using the multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.
resultsThe 10-year overall success and survival rates were 81.3% and 88.4% in this study. Multivariable analysis showed that the male sex (HR 6.22), shorter implants (≤ 8.5 mm) (HR 5.21), and bone augmentation (HR 2.58) were independent predictors of success rate. Bone augmentation (HR 5.14) and narrow implants (≤ 3.3 mm) (HR 3.86) were independent predictors of the survival rate.
conclusionMale sex, shorter or narrow implants, and bone augmentation were independent risk factors for dental implants used in dentomaxillary prostheses in patients with large bone defects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians should consider these risk factors and pay close attention to the management of these patients.
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.