The Effect of Insertion Torque on the Clinical Outcome of Single Implants: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The insertion torque value has been extensively used as an indicator for implant primary stability, which is considered a determining parameter for the implants success. PURPOSE: The primary goal of the present randomized clinical trial was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcome for implants placed with high insertion torque (between 50 Ncm and 100 Ncm) and regular insertion torque (within 50 Ncm) in healed ridges. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Partially edentulous patients, missing one or more mandibular or maxillary teeth, having an adequate amount of bone, requiring implant placement, were randomized to receive Blossom CT implants with regular insertion torque (<50 Ncm) or CT implants with high insertion torque (≥50 Ncm). Implants were left to heal submerged for 3 months. Implants were restored with individualized abutments and cemented metal-ceramic crowns. Acquired measurements were: insertion torque values (IT), thickness of buccal bone plate after implant osteotomy preparation (BBT), marginal bone level (MBL), and facial soft tissue level (FST). All patients were followed 12 months after implant placement. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen implants were placed in one hundred sixteen patients and enrolled for the study. Fifty-eight implants were randomly allocated in regular-IT and high-IT groups with a mean insertion torque ranging from 20 Ncm to 50 Ncm and from 50 Ncm to 100 Ncm, respectively. Three implants failed, and another five implants showed at the 12-month evaluation a marginal bone loss (ΔMBL) greater than 1.5 mm, being considered unsuccessful. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggested that implants inserted with high-IT (≥50 Ncm) in healed bone ridges showed more peri-implant bone remodeling and buccal soft tissue recession than implants inserted with a regular-IT (<50 Ncm). Moreover, sites with a thick buccal bone wall (≥1 mm) - after implant osteotomy site preparation - seemed to be less prone to buccal soft tissue recession after 12 months than sites with a thin buccal bone wall (<1 mm).
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 | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".