MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047131228 · doi:10.1111/clr.12347

Efficacy of standard (<scp>SLA</scp>) and modified sandblasted and acid‐etched (<scp>SLA</scp>ctive) dental implants in promoting immediate and/or early occlusal loading protocols: a systematic review of prospective studies

2014· review· en· W2047131228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leandro Chambrone, Jamil Awad Shibli, Carlos Eduardo Mercúrio, Bruna Doleys Cardoso, Philip M. Preshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Oral Implants Research · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsDentistryMedicineOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the survival percentage, clinical and radiographic outcomes of sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) dental implants and its modified surface (SLActive) in protocols involving immediate and early occlusal loading. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register CENTRAL were searched in duplicate up to, and including, June 2013 to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies of at least 6-month duration published in all languages. Studies limited to patients treated with SLA and/or SLActive implants involving a treatment protocol describing immediate and early loading of these implants were eligible for inclusion. Data on clinical and/or radiographic outcomes following implant placement were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 447 potentially eligible publications identified by the search strategy, seven RCTs comprising a total of 853 implants (8% titanium plasma-sprayed, 41.5% SLA and 50.5% SLActive) and 12 prospective observational studies including 1394 SLA and 145 SLActive implants were included in this review. According to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, one of the studies was considered to be at a low risk of bias, whereas the remaining studies were considered to be at an unclear risk. Regarding the observational studies, all of them presented a medium methodological quality based on the Modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. There were no significant differences reported in the studies in relation to implant loss or clinical parameters between the immediate/early loading and delayed loading protocols. Overall, 95% of SLA and 97% of SLActive implants still survive at the end of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Despite of the positive findings achieved by the included studies, few RCTs were available for analysis for SLActive implants. Study heterogeneity, scarcity of data and the lack of pooled estimates represent a limitation between studies' comparisons and should be considered when interpreting the present findings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.278
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations91
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Oral Implants ResearchSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207