SynthesisMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2025
Survival rate and marginal bone loss in titanium vs titanium-zirconia single-unit narrow diameter implants. A systematic review and Meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Synthesis in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomimetic Surface Engineering of Ti-15Zr (Roxolid™) Implants: Enhancing Osseointegration and Bone Regeneration-A Comprehensive Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Dental Implant Restoration Registry to Evaluate Dental Implant Outcomes in Community Practice Settings: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplant-supported single-unit restorations present a predictable and widely used treatment option to replace missing teeth. Narrow-diameter implants provide a viable treatment option for clinical scenarios with limited bone availability, minimizing the need for bone augmentation procedures. This systematic review aims to assess implant survival and implant marginal bone loss among different single-unit narrow implant diameters and between titanium single-unit and titanium-zirconia single-unit narrow implants. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis article was structured according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA®) Included criteria were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and clinical prospective studies with at least 10 patients, a mean follow-up period of at least 12 months, and assessing single-tooth implants with a diameter of 3.5 mm or less.
resultsTwelve included articles were prospective clinical studies, while 3 articles were randomized controlled clinical studies. There are no significant differences in the comparison between the 2.9-3.0 mm group and the 3.3-3.5 mm group (p=0.933). Both groups had a 99% survival (95% CI, 99.9%-100%). Titanium-zirconia implants presented a mean of marginal bone loss of -0,37 mm (CI, 95%: -0,53 to -0,20) meanwhile, titanium implants had a mean of marginal bone loss of -0,43 mm (CI95%:-0,71 to -0,28).
conclusionsThe findings reveal no significant differences between 2.9-3.3mm and 3.3-3.5mm groups within narrow implants. Both titanium and titanium-zirconia alloys in narrow implants, exhibit comparable high survival rates and minimal marginal bone loss, showcasing their feasibility as a viable treatment alternative in scenarios with limited space or inadequate bone for regular diameter 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.