Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41345355›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2025

Marginal bone loss in single implant-retained mandibular overdentures using two different healing protocols and two different types of attachments: A 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

Marwa Abdel Aal, Matthias Kern, Suzy N Naiem, Iman Abdel Wahab Radi, Nouran Abdel Nabi, Amr Ahmed Naguib, Mohamed Sad Chaar

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Marwa Abdel AalDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo-University, Cairo, Egypt.
Matthias KernDepartment of Prosthodontics, Christian Albrecht University of Kiel, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany.
Suzy N NaiemDepartment of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Iman Abdel Wahab RadiDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo-University, Cairo, Egypt.
Nouran Abdel NabiDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo-University, Cairo, Egypt. nouranabdelnabi@dentistry.cu.edu.eg.
Amr Ahmed NaguibDepartment of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo-University, Cairo, Egypt.
Mohamed Sad ChaarDepartment of Prosthodontics, Christian Albrecht University of Kiel, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives"The objective of this randomized control trial is to compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) in single implant-retained mandibular overdentures (SIRMO) retained by two different types of attachments using two healing protocols after a 2-year follow-up. MATERIALS &

methodsSIRMOs were constructed for eighty completely edentulous patients. The latters were randomized based on the healing protocol and the used attachments into 4 equal groups: Submerged healing with ball attachment (BS), submerged with CM-LOC attachment (CS), non-submerged with ball attachment (BN), and non-submerged with CM-LOC (CN). Standardized peri-apical radiographs at baseline, 12 and 24 months were recorded to measure MBL. Comparisons for numerical data were performed using either Mann Whitney-U or Kruskal Wallis tests. Binary and categorical data were compared using chi square test. Significance level was set at p < .05.

resultsDuring the healing period, 6 implants failed, and 4 drop-outs were recorded. At the second year, 27/34 ball groups and 28/36 CM-LOC groups were recalled, no significant difference between B (0.28 ± 0.44) and C (0.38 ± 0.46) favoring B group (p = .3), and N (0.27 ± 0.39) and S (0.43 ± 0.51) favoring N group (P = .6). MBL revealed no significant difference neither between B and C groups nor between N and S groups.

conclusionBoth attachments showed physiologically accepted limits of MBL, favoring the non-submerged healing protocol after a 2-year follow-up period. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Submerged (S) and Non-submerged (N) protocols could be used for a SIMOR, favoring the N protocol after a 2-year follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PACTR20183003085193.

Indexed as

Alveolar Bone LossDental Implants, Single-ToothDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDenture, OverlayDenture RetentionAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMandibleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeWound HealingBall attachmentCM-LOC attachmentImplant overdentureMandibular midline implantMarginal bone lossNon-submergedSubmerged

Identifiers

PMID41345355
PMCPMC12678570

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.