ArticleCureus2026
Tilted Endosseous Dental Implants in Atrophic Maxilla: A Clinical Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Atrophic edentulous maxillary arches present a significant surgical challenge for conventional implant placement owing to inadequate bone height, pneumatization of the maxillary sinus, and compromised bone quality in the posterior region. Traditional solutions, including sinus floor elevation, ridge augmentation, and bone grafting, carry inherent morbidity and procedural complexity. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of tilted endosseous dental implants placed in atrophic maxillae, with specific assessment of osseointegration quality, crestal bone loss, periodontal parameters, and pain scores at three and six months post-operatively. Methods Thirty tilted endosseous implants were placed in atrophic maxillae of adult patients. Pre-surgical evaluation included cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and orthopantomography (OPG). Modified plaque index, gingival index, probing depth, crestal bone loss, osseointegration quality (Hounsfield units), and pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS)) were assessed immediately post-operatively and at three and six months. Results Mean crestal bone loss at three and six months was 1.46 ± 0.53 mm and 1.75 ± 0.37 mm, respectively, for anterior implants and 1.25 ± 0.31 mm and 1.65 ± 0.35 mm, respectively, for posterior implants. A statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed between anterior and posterior implants for crestal bone loss at both time points. Conclusion Tilted endosseous implants achieved a six-month survival rate of 93.3% (28 of 30 implants) in this cohort and represent a promising treatment option for the atrophic maxilla without requiring sinus augmentation. Larger, long-term prospective studies with a control group are warranted before broader claims of predictability can be made.
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.