ArticleCase reports in dentistry2025
Implant Body Fracture Due to Fatigue in a Maxillary Implant-Retained Overdenture Treatment.
Article in Case reports in dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the causes of fatigue and implant failures in an implant-retained overdenture case. One out of four implants portrayed inadequate osseointegration during healing abutment placement, and one was fractured from the middle to the apical third after 1 year of denture use. Various aspects, such as insufficient cooling while implant socket preparation, incorrect prosthodontic planning, and erroneous design of the denture, were evaluated. Macroscopic and microscopic inspections of the fractured implant body were assessed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical microscopy. Consequently, metallic fatigue along with secondary cracks and beach marks were evident. It was deduced that the failed and fractured implants depicted substandard osseointegration; thus, they were susceptible to the wear out effect of the occlusal forces. Unfavorable osseointegration caused the fulcrum axis to move apically instead of forming on the neck part of the implant, and micromovements around the fulcrum axis mustered the fracture.
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.