Long-term randomized clinical trial evaluating the effects of fixture surface acid-etching and machined collar design on bone healing.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: An implant with an acid-etched fixture surface and internal-hex collar may achieve greater osseointegration. The goal of this research was to study the effects on long-term bone healing of fixture surface acid-etching and machined collar design. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Three two-part implant types were compared: standard Brånemark (with an external-hex 1.2 mm long machined flat collar), Swede-Vent (a copy of the Brånemark design, with an identical collar but a fixture surface acid-etched to 1 to 3 µm), and Screw-Vent (with a fixture surface acid-etched identically to that of Swede-Vent, but a longer internal-hex machined flat collar that did not require countersinking). Fifty-eight subjects each received the three types in alternate fashion at five sites between mental foramen, and a fixed full-arch prosthesis. Abutment-implant interface/microgap (MG) was placed at the crest, and first bone-to-implant contact point-to microgap (fBIC-MG) was measured at mesial and distal sides of each implant. Mean fBIC-MG values were compared after 15 to 20 years of function. Statistical analysis was based on the mixed linear model with the level of significance set at P < .05 and Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons. RESULTS: Brånemark had less mean marginal bone loss (-1.08 mm, standard error [SE] 0.20) compared with Swede-Vent (-1.28 mm, SE 0.20), but pairwise comparisons showed that the difference was not statistically significant (mean difference of 0.20 mm, P = .662). Screw-Vent had the greatest loss (-1.92 mm, SE 0.20), and pairwise comparisons showed that the difference was statistically significant compared with Brånemark and Swede-Vent (difference ≥ 0.64 mm, P < .001). CONCLUSION: According to accepted standards for osseointegration, all three implant types achieved very acceptable long-term results. However, while Brånemark had the least bone loss, the implant with the acid-etched fixture surface and longer internal-hex collar design had the greatest loss. Within the confines of this study, shorter collar length of 1.2 mm may be more important to limit long-term bone loss with microgap placed at the crest.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".