ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Evaluation of Longevity in Screw-Retained Versus Cement-Retained Implant Crowns in Single-Tooth Mandibular Posterior Replacement: A Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study evaluates the longevity of screw-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in the replacement of single-tooth mandibular posterior teeth, assessing survival rates, complications, and maintenance requirements over a 5-year period. Methods: A comparative cohort study design was implemented, involving 120 patients equally divided into two groups: screw-retained and cement-retained crowns. Longevity was assessed based on clinical and radiographic evaluations. Results: The screw-retained group showed a marginally higher survival rate of 96.7%, compared to 92.5% in the cement-retained group. Complications related to peri-implantitis were more frequent in the cement-retained group. Patient satisfaction scores were comparable in both groups. Conclusion: Screw-retained implant crowns exhibited greater longevity and fewer biologic complications compared to cement-retained crowns. However, clinical decision-making should also consider patient-specific factors.
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.