Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35635514›Full record

ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2022

Short and ultra-short (<6-mm) locking-taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas (part II): A 5-year retrospective study on periodontally healthy patients and patients with a history of periodontitis.

Giorgio Lombardo, Annarita Signoriello, Alessia Pardo, Xiomara Zilena Serpa Romero, Luis Armando Vila Sierra, Luisa Arévalo Tovar, Mauro Marincola, Pier Francesco Nocini

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Peri-Implantitis.Dentistry journal · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Giorgio LombardoSchool of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics and Gynaecology (DIPSCOMI), University of Verona, Verona.
Annarita SignorielloSchool of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics and Gynaecology (DIPSCOMI), University of Verona, Verona.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9761-4046
Alessia PardoSchool of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics and Gynaecology (DIPSCOMI), University of Verona, Verona.
Xiomara Zilena Serpa RomeroResearch Group in Family Health, University of Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia.
Luis Armando Vila SierraResearch Group in Family Health, University of Magdalena, Santa Marta, Colombia.
Luisa Arévalo TovarResearch Department, Dental Implant Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia.
Mauro MarincolaResearch Department, Dental Implant Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia.
Pier Francesco NociniSchool of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics and Gynaecology (DIPSCOMI), University of Verona, Verona.
University of Verona · ITUniversity of Cartagena · COUniversity of Magdalena · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShort and ultra-short implants implants supporting single crowns seem to demonstrate high percentages of survival and stable marginal bone levels at a mid-term follow-up. Nevertheless, insurgence of peri-implant complications still represents a critical issue, especially for patients with history of periodontitis. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate implant survival, marginal bone loss and peri-implant complications in 333 short and ultra-short implants, placed in periodontally healthy patients and patients with a history of periodontitis. MATERIALS AND

methodsImplants were placed in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions of 142 patients with (PP) and without (NPP) a history of periodontitis. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 5-year recall appointments.

resultsImplants respectively placed in PP and NPP were: 35.68% and 42.50% in 8.0 mm-length group, 33.33% and 36.67% in 6.0 mm-length group, and 30.99% and 20.83% in 5.0 mm-length group. Implant-based survival after 5 years of follow-up was 95.77% for PP and 96.67% for NPP (p = 0.77). Regarding crestal bone level variations, average crestal bone loss was statistically different (p = 0.04) among PP (0.74 mm) and NPP (0.61 mm). Implants presenting signs of mucositis were 6.86% in PP and 7.76% in NPP (p = 0.76). Setting the threshold for excessive bone loss at 1 mm after 60 months, peri-implantitis prevalence was 7.84% in PP and 2.59% in NPP (p = 0.08). Overall implant success was 92.16% and 97.41%, respectively, for PP and NPP.

conclusionsUnder strict maintenance program, five-year outcomes suggest that short and ultra-short locking-taper implants can be successfully restored with single crowns in the posterior jaws both in PP and NPP.

Indexed as

Alveolar Bone LossDental ImplantsPeriodontitisCrownsDental Prosthesis DesignDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDental Restoration FailureFollow-Up StudiesHumansRetrospective StudiesDental Implantsmucositisperi-implantitisperiodontitisshortsingle crownultra-short

Identifiers

PMID35635514
PMCPMC9546440
OpenAlexW4281738092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.