ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Effect of Various Retentive Element Materials on Retention of Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case Report: Advanced prosthodontic rehabilitation using implant-assisted partial denture guided by the neutral zone concept after fibular reconstruction.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Retention of Ti Si snap versus locator attachments with retention sil in two-implant retained mandibular overdentures: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Early Loading of Two Implants Supporting Mandibular Overdentures in Geriatric Edentulous Patients: A 12-Year Follow-Up Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of different axial wall designs on the fracture strength and stress distribution of ceramic restorations in mandibular first molar.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- Effect of Implant Positions and Angulations on Retentive Strength of 2-Implant Mandibular Overdentures: An In Vitro Study with the New 3D-Printed Simulation Method.International journal of dentistry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the retentive characteristics of each retentive element material and the effects from thermocycling using the two implant-retained mandibular overdenture model. Two stud abutments and three retentive element materials; nylon, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) were used in this study. Four tested groups, with a total of 40 overdentures, were fabricated, including a Locator® abutment with nylon retention insert (NY), Novaloc® abutment with PEEK retention insert (PK), Locator® abutment with PVS retention insert (RL), and Novaloc® abutment with PVS retention insert (RN). The retentive force (N) was measured before thermocycling, and at 2500, 5000, and 10,000 cycles after thermocycling. Significant changes in the percentage of retention loss were found in the NY and PK groups (p < 0.05) at 6 and 12 months for the RL group (p < 0.05) after artificial aging. The RN group exhibited a constant retentive force (p > 0.05). The tendency of the percentage of retention loss significantly increased for PEEK, nylon, and PVS silicone over time. The results of the present study implied that retentive element materials tend to lose their retentive capability as a result of thermal undulation and water dispersion. Nylon and PEEK, comprising strong polar groups in polymer chains, showed a higher rate of retention loss than polyvinylsiloxane.
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.