ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2025
Evaluation of Microstrain in the Regions Surrounding Morse Taper and External Hexagon Implants.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Photoelastic analysis of stress distribution in single and three-unit implant-supported prostheses with different internal connections.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the Morse taper (MT) + titanium base (Ti-Base) abutment with the external hexagon (EH) + Ti-Base abutment by using the strain gauge method in the mesial, distal, and apical-buccal areas around these types of implants. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study investigated two groups, MT and EH, each comprising five polyurethane samples with a dental implant (3.75 × 11.5 mm) in the area of artificial tooth 15. The strain gauges were glued to the mesial, distal, and apical-buccal polyurethane areas of all samples in relation to the implant. Ti-Base nonangled abutments were installed on the implants in each group. Ten identical zirconia crowns were constructed by scanning and milling and were subsequently cemented onto the Ti-base abutments with calcium hydroxide cement. Then, an axial load of 100 N was applied to the occlusal region of the zirconia crowns, and strain gauge measurements were taken. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Strain gauge data were assessed by a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with "implant connection" and "strain gauge position" factors, followed by the Bonferroni test (
resultsThe MT group showed significantly lower microstrain values in the mesial and apical strain gauges compared to the EH group.
conclusionThe MT group exhibited less microstrain in the mesial and apical areas of the polyurethane samples near the implant. Consequently, the MT connection was considered more biomechanically advantageous.
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.