Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40544298›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2025

Peri-implant bone behavior after single drilling technique versus undersized drilling technique of immediately loaded implant in posterior maxilla: a one-year prospective study.

Mohamed Ahmed Galal Sadek, Mohamed Zaghlool Amer, Nesma El-Gohary, Heba Abo-Elfetouh Elsheikh

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06770231 (Peri-implant Bone Behavior After Single Drilling Technique Versus Undersized Technique of Immediately Loaded Implant in Posterior Maxilla), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

NCT06770231 nacompletednot on this map

Peri-implant Bone Behavior After Single Drilling Technique Versus Undersized Technique of Immediately Loaded Implant in Posterior Maxilla: A One-year Prospective Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMansoura UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled32ConditionsImplantArmsSingle drill system
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Mohamed Ahmed Galal SadekDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Mohamed Zaghlool AmerDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Nesma El-GoharyDepartment of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Heba Abo-Elfetouh ElsheikhDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt. heba_elsheikh@mans.edu.eg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplant placement in the posterior maxilla is challenging, so modifications of the surgical techniques were introduced to overcome these challenges. The undersized drilling technique uses a final drill smaller than the diameter of the implant. The single drilling technique is a simplified method where the osteotomy is made using a single drill without sequential widening. This study was directed to evaluate the peri-implant bone behavior of the undersized drilling technique versus the single drilling technique of immediately loaded dental implants inserted in the posterior maxilla. PATIENTS AND

methods32 patients were selected for prosthetic replacement of a missing maxillary posterior single tooth by an immediately loaded dental implant and divided randomly into two equal groups. In Group I: 16 patients received 16 implants using the undersized drilling technique, while in Group II: 16 patients received 16 implants using the single drilling technique. Insertion torque, implant stability, modified sulcus bleeding index (mBI), peri-implant probing depth, bone density, and marginal bone height were evaluated for both groups. Statistical analysis was made for clinical and radiographic data.

results32 implants were inserted in the posterior maxilla. During a 12-month follow-up, every dental implant was successful with no complications. Both techniques showed high insertion torque (≥ 35 Ncm) and primary stability (> 70 ISQ) with no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). Also, there were no significant differences between the study groups regarding peri-implant soft tissue health, bone density, and marginal bone loss (P > 0.05).

conclusionBoth techniques revealed comparable, promising clinical and radiographic outcomes over a 12-month post-loading follow-up period when the immediate loading protocol was used in the posterior maxilla, where bone density is poor, but preparing the implant bed using the single drilling technique offers several merits for both the patient and clinician. In addition to avoiding excessive heat generation, mechanical damage, and high frictional forces during drilling procedures, surgical operations, and surgical site exposure take less time.

trial registrationClinical-Trials.gov PRS ( https://register. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ) had this study registered under the identifier number. NCT06770231 on 01/01/2025.

Indexed as

Dental Implantation, EndosseousDental Implants, Single-ToothImmediate Dental Implant LoadingMaxillaOsteotomyAdultAlveolar Bone LossBone DensityDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeriodontal IndexProspective StudiesImmediate loadingImplant stabilityPosterior maxillaSingle drilling techniqueUndersized drilling technique

Identifiers

PMID40544298
PMCPMC12182666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.