Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35407622›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Marginal Bone Maintenance and Different Prosthetic Emergence Angles: A 3-Year Retrospective Study.

Diego Lops, Eugenio Romeo, Michele Stocchero, Antonino Palazzolo, Barbara Manfredi, Luca Sbricoli

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Comparing Medium to Long-Term Esthetic, Clinical, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Freehand and Computer-Assisted Dental Implant Placement: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Diego LopsDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.
Eugenio RomeoDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.
Michele StoccheroDepartment of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9144-3442
Antonino PalazzoloDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.
Barbara ManfrediDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental Clinic, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5115-4291
Luca SbricoliDepartment of Neurosciences, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2222-5764

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess marginal bone changes around implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles. Patients were treated with implants supporting fixed dentures and were followed for 3 years. Marginal bone levels (MBL) measured at the prosthesis installation (t0) and at the 3-year follow-up visit (t1) were considered. The MBL change from t0 to t1 was investigated. Two groups were considered: Group 1 for restorations with an angle between implant axis and prosthetic emergence profile >30°, and Group 2 for those with an angle ≤30°, respectively. Moreover, peri-implant soft tissue parameters, such as the modified bleeding index (MBI) and plaque index (PI) were assessed. Seventy-four patients were included in the analysis and a total of 312 implants were examined. The mean EA in groups 1 and 2 was 45 ± 4 and 22 ± 7 degrees, respectively. The mean marginal bone level change (MBL change) of 0.06 ± 0.09 mm and 0.06 ± 0.10 mm were, respectively, in groups 1 and 2. The difference in the MBL change between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.969). The MBL change does not seem to be influenced by the emergence angle for implants with a stable internal conical connection and platform-switching of the abutment diameter.

Indexed as

bone leveldental implantemergence profileprospective studysub-crestal placement

Identifiers

PMID35407622
PMCPMC8999635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.