SynthesisBMC oral health2026
Impact of an open healing approach on peri-implant mucosa following immediate implant placement with transmucosal provisionalization: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the peri-implant mucosal stability between an “open healing” approach (test) during immediate dental implant placement with bone grafting and immediate transmucosal provisionalization (non-occlusal) versus primary flap closure (control).
methodsThis systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was conducted in multiple databases up to May 2025. The primary outcome was peri-implant mucosal stability (Midfacial Mucosal Level (MML). Secondary outcomes include peri-implant soft tissue parameters (e.g. Papilla evaluation, mucosal thickness) and bone related outcomes (e.g. Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), buccal bone thickness and implant survival rate).
resultsOut of 362 records, 12 studies were included, representing 431 patients and 438 implants. Most studies demonstrated a low risk of bias, although heterogeneity in outcomes assessment was observed. Meta-analysis showed limited midfacial mucosal changes between control and test groups, showing good stability of peri-implant keratinized tissue. Other soft and hard tissue outcomes were comparable between groups.
conclusionThe open healing approach with bone particle grafting during immediate dental implant placement appears as a viable option for supporting midfacial mucosa and maintaining mucosa and bone stability. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This minimally invasive protocol appears to provide satisfactory outcomes by preserving peri-implant tissues, thereby reducing the need for multiple surgical interventions.
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.