Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Milled in versus round bar for mini implant retained mandibular overdentures: a 8-year retrospective radiographic study of peri-implant bone changes and posterior ridge resorption.
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 NCT06185283 (Milled in Versus Round Bar for Mini-implant Retained Mandibular Overdentures), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Milled in Versus Round Bar for Mini-implant Retained Mandibular Overdentures :A8 Year Retrospective Study of Peri-implant Bone Changes and Posterior Ridge Resorption
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThis retrospective radiography study's main objective was to compare round and milled bars for mandibular overdentures assisted by 4 mini-dental implants (MDI) on peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL)and posterior mandibular ridge resorption(PRR) after 8 years. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty male Participants in a retrospective analysis were treated between 2016 and 2024 who had four interforaminal mini implants supporting an overdenture on a milled bar. Two equal groups of 15 patients each were randomly assigned to receive mandibular overdentures: Group I received overdentures retained by milled bars, while Group II received overdentures retained by round joint bars. After an 8-year follow-up period, a comparison between the two bar designs attachment used for IODs retention. The evaluation of the posterior ridge resorption (PRR) and peri-implant marginal bone loss(MBL) was done after three years (T3), five years(T5), and eight years later (T8)after insertion. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) program for Windows (Standard version 24).
resultsCompared to Group II, Group I's MBL was noticeably higher. As time went on, MBL rose noticeably for both groups. At certain intervals, Group II's PRR was significantly higher than its Group I.
conclusionsThe design of the anchorage system has a major impact on posterior ridge resorption and peri-implant bone loss when four mini-implants are utilized to anchor mandibular overdentures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As mini implants are often seen as a cost-effective solution for patients with limited bone, it is important to understand their long-term performance to make more informed decisions in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: (NCT06185283). Retrospectively registered on (29-12-2023).
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.