Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39056987›Full record

ReviewDentistry journal2024

Clinical Factors on Dental Implant Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Mattia Manfredini, Pier Paolo Poli, Luca Giboli, Mario Beretta, Carlo Maiorana, Matteo Pellegrini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Load-To-Failure of Cantilevered Provisional Implant-Supported Prostheses: Conventional Versus 3D-Printed Resins.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  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

6 authors.

Mattia ManfrediniDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8270-763X
Pier Paolo PoliDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3739-1490
Luca GiboliDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0025-9402
Mario BerettaDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
Carlo MaioranaDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
Matteo PellegriniDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0867-5398

Funding

Ministero della Salute Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dental implant fractures pose a significant challenge to long-term treatment success. This systematic review aims to comprehensively examine the clinical factors influencing dental implant fractures (IFs). Furthermore, strategies to choose the right type of implant and prevent this complication are addressed. A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Eligible studies included retrospective case-control, prospective cohort studies, and clinical trials. The initial search yielded 361 articles, of which 312 were excluded being these reviews, case reports, irrelevant, or written in languages other than English. This left 49 articles, with only 6 meeting the eligibility criteria for an in-depth review. These studies, all retrospective case-control, examine implant characteristics, patient demographics, surgical and prosthetic variables, biomechanical and functional factors, clinical and procedural variables, complications and maintenance issues. The risk of bias was assessed as low using the ROBINS-I tool. Key findings suggest a correlation between implant diameter and structural resistance, with wider implants demonstrating reduced fracture risk. Additionally, posterior regions, especially molars and premolars, exhibit higher susceptibility to IFs due to increased masticatory forces. Implant design and material may considerably influence fracture risk, with conical implants and screw-retained prostheses showing higher vulnerability. Biomechanical overload, particularly in patients with bruxism, emerges as a primary contributing factor to IFs. Prosthesis type significantly influences fracture incidence, with cantilever prostheses posing a higher risk due to increased stress. Peri-implant bone loss is strongly associated with IFs, emphasizing the need for meticulous preoperative assessments and individualized management strategies. Future research should prioritize larger and heterogeneous populations with long-term follow-up and standardized methodologies to enhance the generalizability and comparability of findings. Randomized controlled trials and biomechanical studies under controlled conditions are also essential to elucidate the complex interactions contributing to IFs and developing effective prevention strategies. Additionally, integrating patient-reported outcomes may offer a comprehensive understanding of the impact of IFs on quality of life.

Indexed as

clinical factorsclinical studiesdental implantdentistryfracturesimplantology

Identifiers

PMID39056987
PMCPMC11276356

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.