ArticleJournal of clinical periodontology2025
Early Placement of Patient-Specific One-Piece Drill-Free Fully Digital Designed Dental Implants: A Feasibility Study.
Article in Journal of clinical periodontology, 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.
- Impact of additive manufacturing process of titanium implants on peri-implant human bone.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Early Placement of Patient-Specific One-Piece Drill-Free Fully Digital Designed Dental Implants: A Feasibility Study.Journal of clinical periodontology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimCBCT and CAD/CAM technologies have allowed the development of patient-specific implants requiring no drilling. This prospective study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a novel, drill-free, one-piece root-analogue implant designed using a digital workflow and manufactured additively. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with non-restorable maxillary anterior or premolar teeth requiring extraction and implant placement were included. Implant design was based on pre-extraction cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and optical impressions of the target tooth, adjacent teeth and opposing dentition, and post-extraction scanning of the extracted tooth. Within 14 days post extraction, the implant was designed, manufactured and placed into the alveolar socket, and a temporary crown was installed out of occlusion. The final crown was installed after 3 months. Clinical parameters, including plaque index, gingival index, bleeding on probing, suppuration, peri-implant mucosal margin position, probing depth, probing depth relative to the implant platform and keratinised tissue, were collected at 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 months post loading. Radiographic measurements as well as patient- and clinician-reported outcomes were also assessed.
resultsThe study cohort comprised 12 patients. The cumulative implant survival and success rates reached 100% and 90%, respectively. Clinical and radiographic parameters consistently indicated healthy peri-implant tissues. Patient-reported outcomes demonstrated high satisfaction and minimal discomfort. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for overall satisfaction remained high, with a median of 10 at final restoration delivery (95% CI: 10.00-10.00) and at the 24-month follow-up (95% CI: 9.70-10.01).
conclusionThese patient-specific, root-analogue implants demonstrated both safety and effectiveness, along with high patient satisfaction rates up to 24 months post loading.
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.