Marginal Bone Level Changes at Dental Implants after 5 Years in Function: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is important that peri-implant bone breakdown caused by, for example, undue load and/or peri-implantitis, is prevented or minimized. Some continuous loss of marginal bone is generally accepted, but the question remains as to what extent it must occur. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compile and compare data on peri-implant marginal bone level changes from prospective studies that have registered the peri-implant marginal bone level radiographically at the time of prosthetic loading, and after 5 years of follow-up for implant systems currently available on the market. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was carried out to identify prospective studies on peri-implant marginal bone level changes around dental implants. To be included in a meta-analysis, the implant systems should have been subjected to at least two independent studies. Copycats without documentation were not accepted. RESULTS: Forty prospective studies that presented with a 5-year data were identified. Three implant systems met the inclusion criteria of having at least two independent studies; Astra Tech Dental Implant System® (Astra Tech AB, Mölndal, Sweden), Brånemark System (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden), and Straumann Dental Implant System (Institute Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland). The pooled mean marginal bone level change amounted to -0.24 mm (95% CI -0.345, -0.135) for the Astra Tech Dental Implant System, 0.75 mm (95% CI -0.802, -0.693) for the Brånemark System, and 0.48 mm (95% CI -0.598, -0.360) for the Straumann Dental Implant System over 5 years, with a statistically significant difference (p < .01) between the systems. CONCLUSIONS: The identified implant systems showed an annual bone loss below or much below what hitherto has been set up as a limit for success. A careful documentation of marginal bone level changes should be mandatory for all implant systems before being marketed. It is also time for revision of existing success criteria to refine the basis for clinical quality judgment of implant treatment.
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 | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.057 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".