ArticleJournal of dental sciences2024
A two-year prospective study to compare the peri-implant parameters of posterior implant-supported single crowns with and without mesial proximal contact loss.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Interproximal contact loss may lead to food impaction and result in subsequently periodontal complications. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the peri-implant parameters of posterior implant-supported single crowns (SCs) with and without mesial proximal contact loss after 2 years of follow-up. Material and methods: Twenty-six patients with a total of 40 posterior implant-supported SCs with mesial adjacent natural teeth were observed for 24 months after crown insertion. The mesial proximal contacts were assessed by dental floss, then were classified as tight, weak, and open contacts. The following peri-implant parameters were evaluated, including modified plaque index (MPI), modified gingival index (MGI), and probing depth (PD) were conducted at six sites per tooth (mesiofacail, midfacial, distofacial, mesiolingual, mid-lingual and distolingual) in the 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month following visits. Furthermore, radiographs were taken regularly in 12- and 24-month recall sections for measuring the marginal bone loss (MBL). Results: At 12-month observation, the incidence rates of weak and open contacts were 22.5 % and 12.5 %; whereas after 24 months of clinical service, the rates came up with 12.9 % and 25.6 %, respectively. No significant differences were found between the tight, weak, and open contact groups in the parameters of MPI, MGI, or PD ( Conclusion: The presence of open, weak, and tight mesial proximal contacts had no significant effects on the peri-implant tissue conditions.
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.