MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2897794377 · doi:10.1111/cid.12683

Marginal soft tissue stability around conical abutments inserted with the one abutment‐one time protocol after 5 years of prosthetic loading

2018· article· en· W2897794377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luigi Canullo, Paolo Pesce, Mauro Tronchi, Joseph P. Fiorellini, Yoshiyuki Amari, David Peñarrocha‐Oltra

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbutmentSoft tissueCrown (dentistry)MedicineDentistryOsseointegrationImplantOrthodonticsConical surfaceRepeated measures designSurgeryMaterials scienceMathematicsStructural engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue stability is crucial to obtain and maintain optimal esthetic results. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate, over 5 years, the soft tissue response using a conical abutment together with the "one-abutment one-time" (OA-OT) protocol in the restoration of implants inserted in the anterior esthetic area. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 2011 to January 2012, all consecutive patients requiring an implant n the maxillary area between canines were enrolled. After submerged healing and osseointegration, a definitive abutment with a provisional crown was inserted. After 1 month, the definitive crown was delivered (Tdef). Analog impressions were taken before tooth extraction (T0), at implant insertion Timpl, and Tdef, and at 12 months (T1) and 60 months (T5). Casts were scanned and superimposed using a dedicated software. Differences in vertical height of soft tissue margins between the digitized model casts were calculated and paired sample t test was conducted to compare results. To detect the potential role of biotype, groups (thick vs. thin) were compared by analysis of variance with general linear model. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Three patients dropped out. At the 60-month, 22 patients (12 men and 10 women with mean age of 68.3 ± 11 years) concluded the study follow-up. Horizontal changes demonstrated gain of 1.06 mm at Timpl, 0.94 mm at Tdef, 0.92 mm at T1 and 0.97 mm at T5 compared to T0. Vertical changes demonstrated gain of 0.84 mm at Timpl, 0.11 mm at Tdef, 0.29 mm at T1 and 0.59 mm at T5 compared to T0. The analysis of variance showed a significant better performance of thick biotype in soft tissue horizontal width (P = .022). No statistical differences were noticed for vertical width (P = .111). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a conical abutment together with the OA-OT approach allowed longitudinal stable soft tissue dimensions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research→Same topicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→