ArticleDentistry journal2026
Peri-Implant Tissue Health and Prosthodontic Outcomes of a Cylindrical-Conical Implant with a Progressive Thread Design at Five-Year Follow-Up: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Retrospective Study.
Article in Dentistry journal, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aim to assess the 5-year clinical outcomes of a cylindrical-conical implant system with a progressive thread design and a sandblasted, acid-etched surface and its fixed prostheses under routine clinical conditions.
methodsThis retrospective single-center cross-sectional follow-up study included patients treated with implants with a progressive thread design and an internal butt-joint connection between January 2019 and August 2020 at a specialist referral practice in Germany. Of 112 patients treated, 44 (94 implants with fixed restorations) attended the five-year recall. Outcomes were the Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score (FIPS), peri-implant tissue health parameters (bleeding on probing, suppuration, dehiscence, width of keratinized mucosa, and other signs of inflammation), marginal bone level on periapical radiographs, and implant survival.
resultsAll 94 implants available for examination remained in situ at five years, corresponding to 100% survival among recalled implants. Mean FIPS was 7.6 out of 10 (interproximal 1.3, occlusion 1.8, design 1.6, mucosa 1.4, bone 1.5). Bleeding on probing was absent in 37.2% of implants and present at ≥3 of 6 sites in 30.9%; suppuration was absent in all cases. Bleeding was descriptively more frequent where keratinized mucosa was narrow: implants with <2 mm bled at nearly three times as many sites as those with ≥2 mm. No implant showed a marginal bone level ≥2.0 mm apical to the shoulder.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this retrospective cross-sectional follow-up study, the implant system with a progressive thread design demonstrated favorable 5-year prosthodontic, biological and radiological findings under referral-practice conditions.
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.