ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of the effects of geometric design and surface properties of dental implants on marginal bone loss and bone quality by fractal analysis.
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.
- Retrospective radiographic assessment of marginal bone level changes and peri-implant trabecular bone patterns around implants healed with healing abutments or cover screws.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of early trabecular changes around implants using fractal analysis and panoramic indices.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparative Fractal Analysis on Orthopantomography Images of Bone Remodeling Changes at 3 Months Between Natural Socket Healing and Immediate Implant Placement.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to investigate the effects of surface properties and geometric design on marginal bone loss in dental implants and to compare the parallelism of bone loss and fractal analysis results.
methodsA total of 378 implants from 114 patients were evaluated in this study using panoramic and periapical radiographs. Implants were categorized into 19 subgroups according to the jaw where they were placed, length, diameter, surface preparation, type of prosthetic superstructure, and neck design. Radiological evaluations were conducted based on radiographs obtained at the time of implant placement and 3 months after prosthetic loading. After obtaining measurements of marginal bone loss and fractal analysis data, the significance of differences between groups was statistically evaluated.
resultsMarginal bone loss was significantly higher in the maxilla compared to the mandible when considering the changes between jaws (p < 0.05). Analysis of variations among prosthetic superstructures revealed that implant-supported removable prostheses had the highest marginal bone loss (p < 0.05). Additionally, marginal bone loss was significantly lower in implants with coronal microthreads not exceeding 1 mm compared to those exceeding 1 mm (p < 0.05). Also the increase in fractal values was significantly higher in implants with coronal microthreads 1 mm compared to 3 mm. CONSLUSION: This study demonstrates that the geometric design of dental implants may have an impact on marginal bone loss, which is a determinant of long-term success. However, considering that marginal bone loss has a multifactorial etiology, further studies are needed to identify other potential factors contributing to marginal bone loss.
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.