ArticleBMC oral health2026
Survival of single-tooth implants in sites with and without history of external cervical root resorption: a register-based cohort study.
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
purposeTo compare the survival of single-tooth implants placed in sites with previous external cervical root resorption (ECRR) to those placed in unaffected sites.
methodsA retrospective matched cohort study was conducted using data from the Swedish National Dental Health Register (2009-2022). Patients receiving a single-tooth implant in a site with previous ECRR were identified and matched 1:1 to controls without such history by age, sex, tooth position, and timing of implant placement (± 2 years). Implant survival, defined as time from placement to removal, was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and stratified Cox proportional hazards models. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was estimated up to 10 years. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses assessed robustness.
resultsThe final cohort included 605 matched pairs (n = 1,210). The mean age was 52 years, and 56% of implants were placed in the maxillary anterior region. Implant extraction occurred in 12/571 (2.1%) sites with previous ECRR and 21/564 (3.7%) control sites. Ten-year cumulative survival was 97.3% for sites with previous ECRR and 94.4% for controls. The difference was not statistically significant (HR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.28-1.22; p = 0.15). RMST analysis showed a negligible absolute survival difference (0.11 years; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.25; p = 0.15).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of registry-based data and a low number of failures, no statistically significant difference in implant survival was detected between sites with and without previous ECRR. These findings suggest comparable survival outcomes but should be interpreted with caution.
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.