Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40698516›Full record

ArticleClinical oral implants research2025

Osseointegration in the Absence of Primary Stability: An Experimental Preclinical Mandibular Minipig Overpreparation In Vivo Model.

Thomas Gill, Hansley Ooi, Emre Tezulas, Aviva Petrie, Simon Rawlinson, Mario Roccuzzo, Shakeel Shahdad

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Thomas GillInstitute of Dentistry, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1234-521X
Hansley OoiInstitute of Dentistry, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Emre TezulasDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.
Aviva PetrieFaculty of Medical Sciences, Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Simon RawlinsonInstitute of Dentistry, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Mario RoccuzzoPrivate Practice, Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2135-6503
Shakeel ShahdadInstitute of Dentistry, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

Institut Straumann AG
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe effect of osteotomy overpreparation, and thus lack of primary stability, on implant osseointegration and crestal bone volume maintenance was investigated by comparing placement of dental implants with either a standard osteotomy preparation (NP) or an overprepared osteotomy (OP) where the final osteotomy drill was larger in diameter than the implant placed.

methodsBone-level implants (Ø3.3 mm diameter) were placed in the mandible of minipigs with two preparation techniques: an NP (Group 1) and an OP to a final osteotomy of 3.5 mm in diameter (Group 2) and submerged for 2 and 8 weeks. An Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) was measured for each implant at placement. Implant survival, defined histologically as the absence of fibrous encapsulation and the presence of direct bone-to-implant contact, osseointegration and crestal bone formation were analysed histologically and histomorphometrically to compare the preparation techniques.

resultsA 100% survival for both preparation types was observed. The mean ISQ at insertion for Groups 1 and 2 was 69.35 a.u. (95% CI: 68.02-70.68) and 11.95 a.u. (95% CI: 10.53-13.37) respectively (p < 0.001). At 2 and 8 weeks, there was no difference between the two groups for total bone-to-implant contact (tBIC) (p > 0.05). Group 2 demonstrated significantly higher mean first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC), coronal bone-to-implant contact (cBIC) and bone-area-to-total-area (BATA) at 2 and 8 weeks compared to Group 1 (p < 0.05).

conclusionImplants inserted into an overprepared osteotomy with no primary stability successfully osseointegrated. At 2 and 8 weeks, OP resulted in significantly more coronal bone apposition and maintenance of coronal bone volume as measured by fBIC, cBIC and BATA.

Indexed as

Dental Implantation, EndosseousDental ImplantsMandibleOsseointegrationOsteotomyAnimalsModels, AnimalSwineSwine, MiniatureDental ImplantsBICbone‐implant‐contactcrestal bone formationimplantimplant surfacein vivoosseointegrationprimary stability

Identifiers

PMID40698516
PMCPMC12491923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.