ArticleBMC oral health2025
Abutment connection structural changes in dual-retained and screw-retained metal-ceramic implant-supported restorations: an in vitro study, part I.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- Effect of Implant Angulation on Digital Impression Accuracy of Three-Unit Implant-Supported Restorations.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Passivity, torque stability, and fracture resistance in screw-retained and dual-retained metal-ceramic implant-supported restorations: an in vitro study, part II.Head & face medicine · 2025Article
- Stress evaluation of different cad-on material combinations in crown design over conventional hand-layered zirconia - an in vitro 3d finite element analysis.Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Article
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
backgroundThis study sought to compare the rotational freedom and structural changes of abutment connections in dual-retained and screw-retained metal-ceramic implant restorations at different fabrication stages and following thermomechanical loading.
methodsTwenty metal-ceramic restorations were equally divided into two groups. Group 1 (G1) consisted of dual-retained restorations on prefabricated titanium abutments, while Group 2 (G2) comprised screw-retained restorations on UCLA chromium-cobalt overcast abutments. Specimens underwent 500 cycles of thermocycling and 500,000 cycles of mechanical loading. Changes in connection dimensions and rotational freedom were compared within and between the groups before- and post-loading. Statistical analyses were conducted using a generalized linear model (GLM). The significance level was set at α = 0.05.
resultsInitially, no significant differences in connection dimensions were observed between the groups (P >.05). After loading, G2 exhibited significantly smaller hexagon side lengths and diagonal measurements, along with increased hexagonal angle deformation and concentricity (P <.001) compared to G1. Rotational freedom was significantly greater in G2 compared to G1 both before and after thermomechanical loading (P <.001). G2 experienced significant dimensional changes before and after loading (P <.001), whereas G1 showed no significant changes in connection dimensions pre- and post-loading (P >.05).
conclusionsDual-retained restorations outperformed screw-retained ones with minimal connection alteration and higher rotational stability.
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.