ArticleBMC oral health2025
Prevalence and risk factors of interproximal contact loss between implant-supported prostheses and adjacent teeth in posterior dentitions: a retrospective study.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital quantitative analysis of biomechanical factors of proximal contact loss of first molar implant crown.BMC oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDental implant therapy is widely used to restore dentition defects or loss, however, as a complication of it, interproximal contact loss (ICL) has not been adequately studied.
objectiveTo explore the prevalence of ICL between implant-supported prostheses and adjacent teeth, and to analyze the risk factors for ICL.
methodsTwo hundred and four participants who received 445 implant-supported prostheses from January 2011 to December 2020 were enrolled in the study. Aluminum strips of different thicknesses were used to determine the interspace between the implant-support prostheses and the adjacent teeth. Medical records of implant prostheses and participants were reviewed. Periodontal condition, occlusion, and additional factors were examined. Statistical analyses were performed to estimate the prevalence rate of ICL and its influential factors.
resultsThe prevalence of ICL was 59.8% at the patient level for 10-years function duration and increased over time. For the mesial site, the prevalence of ICL was 40.0% and food impaction (OR = 4.991, P < 0.001), adjacent teeth status (OR = 4.062, P = 0.042), function duration (OR = 1.299, P < 0.001) and bruxism (OR = 2.098, P = 0.034) were independent risk factors. For the distal site, the prevalence of ICL was 24.1% and food impaction (OR = 2.809, P = 0.002), mechanical complications (OR = 7.041, P < 0.001), bruxism (OR = 2.356, P = 0.019) and peri-implantitis (OR = 2.385, P = 0.021) were independent risk factors for ICL.
conclusionsICL was found to increase over time and was more common at the mesial site than at the distal site. Food impaction, function duration, adjacent teeth status, implant mechanical complications, bruxism and peri-implantitis were risk factors for ICL.
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.