ArticleJournal of dental sciences2026
Histologic and histomorphometric assessments of provisionally restored dental implants.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Immediate provisionalization of dental implants has been considered a safe and predictable treatment modality; however, histologic evidence from human biopsies remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and clinical outcomes of immediately provisionalized implants. Materials and methods: This prospective clinical study included 5 patients receiving 7 immediately provisionalized implants in both the maxilla and mandible. All implants achieved primary stability and were restored with provisional restorations that were loaded with light centric contacts. Biopsies were obtained at 3 months and processed for histologic and histomorphometric analysis. Results: All implants remained clinically stable throughout the observation period, resulting in a 100 % survival rate. Histologic examination confirmed direct bone-to-implant contact (BIC), with newly formed lamellar bone observed along the implant surface. Histomorphometric analysis revealed a mean BIC of 76.51 ± 7.91 %, which is comparable to values reported in conventionally loaded implants. No adverse biological or prosthetic events were observed. Conclusion: Immediate provisional implants demonstrated substantial BIC and favorable clinical outcomes in this study. These findings provide histologic confirmation that immediate provisionalization is a safe and efficacious protocol when primary stability and careful occlusal management are achieved.
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.