Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40252237›Full record

SynthesisJournal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists2025

Narrow-diameter implants for treatment with fixed restorations in the posterior region: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aspasia Pachiou, Panagiotis Tsirogiannis, Alexis Ioannidis, Tim Joda, Nikitas Sykaras, Olga Naka

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Narrow-diameter implants for treatment with fixed restorations in the posterior region: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. [Research progress on three-dimensional finite element analysis for fixed implant restoration of edentulous jaw].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Aspasia PachiouDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2236-4345
Panagiotis TsirogiannisDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5527-5293
Alexis IoannidisClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2110-3645
Tim JodaClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1338-5419
Nikitas SykarasDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Olga NakaDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2234-4229

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the survival and complication rates of narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) for treatment with fixed restorations in premolar and molar sites.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the preferred reporting items of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches were performed according to a Population-Intervention-Outcome (PIO) format in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, supplemented by manual cross-referencing. Inclusion criteria encompassed clinical studies on NDIs (<3.75 mm diameter) restored with fixed dental prostheses (FDP) in the posterior region. Random-effect models were employed to pool survival and complication rates, and heterogeneity was assessed using the Q test and I

resultsThirty-six trials involving 2741 NDIs were included in the systematic review and 29 in the meta-analysis. Survival rates (SRs) ranged from 92.73% to 100% with follow-up periods from 10.8 months to 12 years. Pooled SRs for maxillary (97.0%; 95%CI: 96.2%-97.8%) and mandibular (96.5%; 95%CI: 95.7%-97.3%) NDIs were not significantly different (p = 0.688). Comparing NDIs in the premolar and molar sites, jaw location demonstrated similar SRs of 97.5% (95% CI: 95.9%-99.1%) and 98.6% (95% CI: 96.5%-99.6%), respectively. Technical complication rates varied from 0% to 23.5%, with follow-up periods ranging from 1 to 12 years. These complications primarily included screw loosening, fractures, and detachment of restorations. Data on biological complications were notably limited, and due to the heterogeneity in reporting, comparisons were not feasible.

conclusionNDIs demonstrate high survival and low complication rates for therapy of the partially edentulous patient with FDPs in posterior sites. The clinical performance is consistent across jaw location and implant materials.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsDental Prosthesis DesignDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDenture, Partial, FixedBicuspidDental Restoration FailureHumansMolarDental Implantscomplicationdental implantfixed dental prosthesis (FDP)meta‐analysisminimally invasive therapysurvivalsystematic reviewtitanium‐zirconium

Identifiers

PMID40252237
PMCPMC12378935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.