Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Marginal Bone Changes around Platform‐Switching Implants Placed in Crestal or Subcrestal Positions: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been reported in many articles that marginal bone resorptions are prevented by platform-switching design. However, what occurs when these implants are placed in the apical position is not completely known. PURPOSE: This report describes a randomized controlled clinical trial study that aims to test the hypothesis that less resorption will occur when platform-switching implants are placed 1 mm below bone level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 56 randomly selected implants were inserted bilaterally, either 1 mm below bone level (test group, 28 implants) or at bone level (control group, 28 implants) of the patients' posterior regions. Marginal bone resorptions were examined through periapical radiographies taken with the parallel technique at the time of crown cementation and the third, sixth, 12th, and 36th months after prosthetic loading. The modified plaque index, gingival index, bleeding on probing, and probing depths were used for follow-up periodontal care of the implants. RESULTS: After 3 years, the mean radiographic vertical bone loss in the control group was significantly lower than in the test group (0.56 ± 0.35 mm and 1.21 ± 1.05 mm, respectively) (p < .01). In terms of periodontal indexes, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (p > .05). No peri-implantitis or peri-implant mucositis was observed around the test or control implants. CONCLUSIONS: More marginal bone resorptions occurred after the third year of loading in implants placed 1 mm below bone level. However, the resorptions did not reach the implants thread. In the control group, the first bone implant contact was placed under the level of the first threads. Therefore, the present randomized clinical trial confirmed the hypothesis that placing platform-switching implants 1 mm below bone level reduced marginal bone loss. It can be noted that to reduce resorption, platform-switching implants should be placed below bone level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".