ArticleBMC oral health2026
A comparative analysis of efficacy of torque limiting devices provided by different dental implant manufacturers.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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.
- The Effects of Multiple Use and Sterilization on the Accuracy of Readings of Different Types of Torque Controllers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbutment screw loosening is a frequently reported prosthetic complication that has been linked to the achieved preload, wear of the components of the connection and micromotions or deformation under occlusal load. Inadequate fit and tightness of the implant-abutment interface can cause fracture or the creation of a gap with predisposition to its bacterial colonization. The aim of this research was to assess the accuracy of three mechanical torque-limiting devices provided by different dental implant manufacturers.
methodsThis study was designed as an in vitro model. Torque wrenches effective values and the evaluation of fixture-abutment microgap were evaluated. The actual torque of the wrenches was analyzed by setting five unused torque limiting devices for each manufacturer at 15, 20 and 25 Ncm; each wrench performed twenty measurements at 15, 20 and 25 Ncm respectively. For gap analysis, three groups of fixtures (each one of twenty implants with related abutments), from three different companies, were examined. Each group was divided into two equal subgroups (ten implants with related abutments), which were tightened using a torque of 20 and 25 Ncm respectively.
resultsThe study showed that all wrenches examined exert a torque lower than the one set and indicated on the wrench. The error range varies from a minimum of 11% (seen on A wrench set to a value of 20 Ncm) to a maximum of 29.3% (seen on B wrench set to a value of 15 Ncm). All the examined wrenches were able to assure, at 25Ncm, the absence of microgap at the fixture-abutment interface.
conclusionsThe accuracy of the mechanical limiting torque devices differed from different manufacturers. The clinician should know the range of wrenches imprecision of the own dental implant system to applicate more precise tightening force for prosthetic screw to prevent mechanical complications.
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.