ArticleClinical oral implants research2026
Comparison of Long vs. Short Concave Neck in One-Piece Implants Inserted 1 mm Subcrestally: A Pre-Clinical In Vivo Study.
Article in Clinical oral implants research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim was to assess the influence of one-piece implant concave neck height on soft- and hard-tissue healing on a canine model. MATERIAL AND
methodsMonoblock implants with a transgingival concave neck were randomly inserted 1 mm subcrestally. Eight implants were characterized by a neck 2.8 mm long (group long) and eight implants by 1.8 mm (group short). After 3 months, the implants were retrieved and processed for histology. The quality and quantity of peri-implant tissues were investigated.
resultsHistological analysis showed that all implants were osseointegrated, and peri-implant mucosa surrounded the abutment's surface in all 16 specimens. The qualitative analysis of soft tissues showed some differences among the groups. In particular, in the group "long", collagen fibers perpendicular to the implant's longitudinal axis were intertwined with the transverse fibers. Perpendicular fibers were detected in the same area as the short-neck implants, but the longitudinal fibers were less numerous and farther from the surface. No statistically significant differences were found in comparisons of soft and hard tissues between the short and long groups.
conclusionsAfter 3 months, no statistically significant quantitative differences were found between long and short concave necks for most of the measurements performed, although qualitative differences in collagen fiber orientation were observed.
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.