Flapped versus flapless surgery and delayed versus immediate loading for a four mini implant mandibular overdenture: A <scp>RCT</scp> on post‐surgical symptoms and short‐term clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This factorial randomized clinical trial (RCT) tested the effects of the surgical approach (flapped-FPS vs. flapless-FLS surgery) and loading protocol (delayed-DL vs. immediate-IL) for treatment with a four mini implant mandibular overdenture. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 296 one-piece titanium-zirconium mini-implants were inserted in 74 patients (IL/FLS = 17; IL/FPS = 18; DL/FLS = 20; and DL/FPS = 19). Outcomes included patient's perceived surgical burdens, clinical time, implant survival, and post-surgical symptoms and complications, assessed immediately after surgery, in the 7-day and 6-week follow-ups. RESULTS: Perceived surgical burdens were relatively low, higher for females, and no difference was found between FPS and FLS surgery. Surgical time was lower for FLS surgery. Overall symptoms were mild after 24 h, and higher for females. Less symptoms were recorded for the FLS surgery compared to the FPS for the delayed loading patients, and FLS surgery was associated with a lower risk of bleeding. No early implant failure was observed until the 6-week follow-up. Delayed was associated with discontinuous use of the prosthesis and poor function. Lower complaint rates were observed for immediate loading regardless of the surgery protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Mini implants for mandibular overdenture are a feasible option regardless of surgical access and loading protocol, with high safety and predictable survival rates, and low incidence of post-insertion complications. FLS surgery requires less clinical time and results in easier intraoral prosthetic incorporation of attachments compared to FPS surgeries. Immediate loading did not increase the risk of early implant failure when satisfactory primary stability was achieved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".