Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37886912›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2023

Effect of Implant Macro-Design and Magnetodynamic Surgical Preparation on Primary Implant Stability: An In Vitro Investigation.

Alessandro Antonelli, Selene Barone, Ferdinando Attanasio, Marianna Salviati, Maria Giulia Cerra, Elena Calabria, Francesco Bennardo, Amerigo Giudice

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Breakthroughs in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Alessandro AntonelliSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9557-3586
Selene BaroneSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Ferdinando AttanasioSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9299-0467
Marianna SalviatiSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Maria Giulia CerraSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Elena CalabriaSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0739-5650
Francesco BennardoSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6528-2681
Amerigo GiudiceSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9374-0566
Magna Graecia University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMacro-geometry and surgical implant site preparation are two of the main factors influencing implant stability and potentially determining loading protocol. The purpose of this study was to assess the initial stability of various implant macro-designs using both magnetodynamic and traditional osteotomy techniques in low-density bone. The parameters examined included peak insertion torque (PIT), implant stability quotient (ISQ), and peak removal torque (PRT).

methodsFour groups of 34 implants each were identified in accordance with the surgery and implant shape: T5 group (

resultsThe PIT values were 25.04 ± 4.4 Ncm for T5, 30.62 ± 3.81 Ncm for M5, 30 ± 3.74 Ncm for TT, and 32.05 ± 3.55 Ncm for MT. The average ISQ values were 68.11 ± 3.86 for T5, 71.41 ± 3.69 for M5, 70.88 ± 3.08 for TT, and 73 ± 3.5 for MT. The PRT values were 16.47 ± 4.56 Ncm for T5, 26.02 ± 4.03 Ncm for M5, 23.91 ± 3.28 Ncm for TT, and 26.93 ± 3.96 Ncm for MT. Based on our data analysis using a t-test with α = 0.05, significant differences in PIT were observed between TT and T5 (

conclusionOur data showed favorable primary implant stability (PS) values for both implant macro-geometries. Furthermore, the magnetodynamic preparation technique appears to be more effective in achieving higher PS values in low-density bone.

Indexed as

implant macro-designimplant site preparationinsertion torquemagnetic malletmagnetodynamic osteotomyprimary implant stabilityresonance frequency analysis

Identifiers

PMID37886912
PMCPMC10605303
OpenAlexW4386995824

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.