ArticleBMC oral health2026
Comparative evaluation of screw loosening and joint integrity across different implant-abutment connection types utilizing stock and CAD/CAM abutments under cyclic loading.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScrew loosening is a common complication in dental implants, compromising their long-term stability and success. Implants with internal connection play a critical role in maintaining the structural integrity of implants by reducing the possibility of screw loosening. PURPOSE: To study torque loss in two different types of internal implant-abutment connections utilizing stock & custom-made abutments under application of cyclic loading. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo groups were used; each group had sixteen epoxy-resin blocks divided into eight block in each subgroup. Implants with an internal implant abutment connection (hexagonal & trilobe) were installed in the epoxy-resin blocks, after abutment installation scanning was done and the crown was fabricated via CAD/CAM technology. After cementation of the crowns, the initial removal torque value was recorded via a digital torque gauge, and each block was prepared with an acrylic base to fit in the chewing simulator to apply dynamic cyclic loading. After the application of cyclic loading, the post load removal torque value was recorded. The removal torque loss ratio of the abutment screw before and after dynamic cyclic loading was subsequently calculated to evaluate the screw joint stability via removal torque measurements.
resultThere was a significant difference in the amount of torque loss between the two types of internal connections.
conclusionThere was removal torque loss in both types of internal implant-abutment connections, demonstrating that the internal hexagon connection exhibited significantly lower torque loss compared to the internal trilobe connection in the tested groups. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: Stock abutments offer superior mechanical stability and a significantly lower incidence of screw loosening under occlusal loading compared to custom-made alternatives. Furthermore, the hexagonal internal connection demonstrates enhanced structural integrity over the trilobe configuration, making it the preferred choice for long-term prosthetic success and reduced maintenance in high-load dental restorations.
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.