One‐year clinical outcomes of locking taper Equator attachments retaining mandibular overdentures to narrow diameter implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Narrow diameter implants (NDI) are recommended to retain mandibular overdentures (MOs) in cases of limited bone thickness. It is necessary to evaluate the clinical behavior of NDI as MO retainers connected to a new screwless locking taper abutments, their predictability and maintenance problems. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the peri-implant tissue behavior around NDI and the performance of locking taper stud abutments as MO retainers. METHODOLOGY: Thirty patients (average age of 67.5 years) received 2 NDI implants (2.9 × 10 mm) loaded after 12 weeks using Equator stud attachments. The plaque index (PI), calculus index (CI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and implant stability quotient (ISQ) were monitored during osseointegration at 0, 4, 8, and 12 weeks and postloading at 24, 48, and 60 weeks. The marginal bone level (MBL) and bone level changes (BLC) were determined at baseline and 60 weeks. RESULTS: The cumulative success rate was 83.3%. The PI oscillated in the first 24 weeks and decreased from 48 weeks onward, while the CI score showed significantly higher values at week 8 (22%). The GI also peaked at week 8 (18.6%) and decreased from week 12 onward. The PD decreased gradually over time, but no significant differences were found between weeks 8 and 12. The ISQ decreased significantly between 0 and 12 weeks. After MO loading, the ISQ values increased linearly and significantly between 12 and 24, 24 and 48, and 48 and 60 weeks and reached values similar to the primary stability after 60 weeks [56.1(42.0-65.3)]. No significant MBL was observed at 60 weeks, with an average BLC of -0.06 ± 0.64 mm. CONCLUSION: NDI connected to locking taper Equator attachments showed a stable clinical behavior as an MO retainer for edentulous patients with clinical mandibular atrophy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".