ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2026
Zirconia and Titanium Implants Placed at Two Supracrestal Levels in Fresh Extraction Socket: Canine Periodontitis Model.
Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of titanium and zirconia implants placed supracrestally into fresh extraction sockets in a canine model with naturally occurring periodontitis. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 32 implants were placed in eight dogs. The titanium (Control, Group 1) and zirconia (Test, Group 2) implants with a 0.4 mm machined collar were placed into fresh extraction sockets at two vertical positions: 0 mm (subgroup a) and 1 mm (subgroup b) exposure of rough surface to make the artificial condition of alveolar bone loss around the implant. Peri-implant mucosal tissue inflammation (MTI), implant stability quotient (ISQ), and marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated at 6, 12, and 18 weeks postoperatively.
resultsZirconia implants demonstrated comparable results to titanium in implant stability and peri-implant soft tissue response. Although MTI scores were slightly higher in zirconia implants than titanium for the entire period, there was no significant issue during osseointegration. The ISQ values increased significantly at 6 weeks in all groups. Mean MBL gradually increased over time; among implants with exposed rough surfaces, Group 1b exhibited the highest MBL (0.71 ± 0.38 mm), whereas Group 2b showed significantly less bone loss (0.32 ± 0.30 mm) (p = 0.05).
conclusionsIn natural periodontitis canine model, titanium and zirconia implants placed into fresh extraction sockets demonstrated similar stability during healing period. Zirconia implants exhibited significantly less MBL than titanium under the condition of rough surface exposure, indicating a more favorable peri-implant bone response with zirconia.
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.