ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2025
A prospective clinical study of immediate implant placement in the maxillary esthetic zone.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Esthetic evaluation of immediate implants in the maxillary anterior region.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Immediate Loading of Implants Placed Immediately in Fresh Sockets: A 10-Year Single-Arm Prospective Case Series Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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
Abstract
purposeImmediate implant placement (IIP) offers several advantages, including minimizing hard and soft tissue deformation, reducing implant time and cost, and rapidly restoring tooth function. However, IIP is technically challenging due to the need to secure initial stability and limit functional loading during healing. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a bone-level implant featuring a dual thread design-an upper U-shaped thread and a lower V-shaped thread-with an 11° internal hexagonal connection in IIP within the maxillary esthetic zone.
methodsThis study included 20 patients. Implants were inserted immediately after tooth extraction. Soft tissue changes were evaluated before tooth extraction (V0), after IIP (V1), at prosthesis delivery (V5), at a 3-month follow-up after prosthesis delivery (V6), and at a 1-year follow-up (V8). Bone dimensional changes were assessed at V1 and V8 using cone beam computed tomography, and the marginal bone level (MBL) was evaluated at V6 and V8 using 2-dimensional.
resultsOf the 20 patients, 3 dropped out due to osseointegration failure during the follow-up period. Although the horizontal dimensions of the soft and hard tissues decreased slightly, the gingival margin and MBL remained well maintained throughout the follow-up.
conclusionsWithin this limited dataset, the lower V-shaped thread enabled favorable initial stability in IIP, and the esthetic outcomes were positive-with minimal gingival recession and marginal bone loss. Long-term follow-up is required to fully assess the impact of thread design and connection on esthetics.
trial registrationClinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0008231.
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.