Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39195077›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2024

Comparison of Aesthetic, Mechanical Outcome, and Bone Loss in Angulated Screw Channels (ASCs) and Cement-Retained Implant-Supported Prosthesis: A Case-Control Study.

Edoardo Rella, Paolo De Angelis, Laura Papetti, Giovanni Damis, Giulio Gasparini, Antonio D'Addona, Paolo Francesco Manicone

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Edoardo RellaDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5487-3232
Paolo De AngelisDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0310-0037
Laura PapettiDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Giovanni DamisDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Giulio GaspariniMaxillo-Facial Surgery Unit, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Antonio D'AddonaDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Paolo Francesco ManiconeDivision of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Department of Head and Neck, Oral Surgery, and Implantology Unit, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, IRCSS "A. Gemelli" Foundation, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0283-2903

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Angulated-screw channels (ASCs) allow the clinician to employ screw-retained restorations in almost all cases, as the access hole can be moved away from the vestibular portion of the crown, where it would jeopardize the final esthetic result. The objective of this study was to compare screw-retained restorations employing ASCs with restorations cemented on angled abutments. In this study, 30 subjects, equally divided into two groups: group 1 (cemented restorations on angulated abutments) and group 2 (screw-retained restorations adopting ASCs), were treated and retrospectively compared after 2 years using the pink esthetic score (PES) and the white esthetic score (WES). All restorations were in use at the last follow-up, with a survival rate of 100%. Three mechanical complications were observed (2 chippings and 1 crown came loose), with a success rate of 93% in group 1 and 87% in group 2 (

Indexed as

dental implant-abutment designdental implantsdental prosthesis design

Identifiers

PMID39195077
PMCPMC11353712

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.