ReviewJournal of oral & maxillofacial research
One-Abutment-One-Time
Review in Journal of oral & maxillofacial research. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The one-abutment-one-time protocol has been proposed to improve peri-implant tissue stability by minimizing repeated abutment manipulation. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effect of one-abutment-one-time compared with repeated abutment disconnections on peri-implant marginal bone loss and secondary clinical outcomes in platform-switched, conical-connection dental implants. Material and Methods: A PRISMA-guided systematic review of randomized controlled trials published between 2018 and 2025 was conducted. Studies included adult patients restored with bone-level, platform-switched implants with an internal conical connection. Marginal bone loss (MBL) was the primary outcome; probing depth (PD), implant survival, and biological and prosthetic complications were secondary outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Results: Seven randomized controlled trials were included. All studies reported numerically lower MBL with one-abutment-one-time (OAOT). Pooled analysis of six parallel-group trials demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in MBL favouring OAOT (mean difference -0.23 mm; 95% CI = -0.44 to -0.02). No significant differences were observed for PD. Implant survival rates were high and comparable between protocols, and complication rates were low with no consistent intergroup differences. Conclusions: The one-abutment-one-time protocol is associated with a modest but consistent reduction in peri-implant marginal bone loss in platform-switched, conical-connection implants, without clear benefits for other peri-implant clinical outcomes.
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.