ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Between Single Symphyseal and Parasymphyseal Implants Versus Two Implant-Assisted Complete Mandibular Overdentures.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Single versus two implant-supported mandibular overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of implant survival and prosthetic complications.International journal of implant dentistry · 2025Pooled it
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
purposeThis study aimed to compare the efficacy of single implants in the symphyseal and parasymphyseal regions with that of two implants in complete mandibular overdentures. PATIENTS AND
methodsFifteen completely edentulous male patients (50-65 years) were chosen and randomly grouped into three equal groups (five patients in each) according to the position and number of the received implants to assist mandibular complete overdentures: group I: single median implant; group II: single parasymphyseal implant; and group III: two implants were inserted in the canine area bilaterally. After three months of osseointegration, the lower denture was transformed into an implant-assisted complete mandibular overdenture. Clinical observations were documented on the day of loading, and three, six, and nine months later for each implant. Follow-up cone beam computed tomography scans were performed to assess marginal bone loss on the day of loading, and six and twelve months later. The masticatory efficiency evaluation was conducted one and three months after loading.
resultsThe obtained results demonstrated insignificant differences between the three groups concerning marginal bone loss, plaque index, pocket depth, and bleeding index. Regarding the masticatory efficiency, the results revealed a significantly higher masticatory efficiency in group III than in groups I and II.
conclusionUsing two implants to retain mandibular overdentures is the first choice due to their higher masticatory efficiency than a single implant. However, a single implant may be a viable treatment alternative, especially in cases where there are any limitations that restrict the use of additional implants.
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.