Marginal bone changes around platform‐switched conical connection implants placed 1 or 2 mm subcrestally: A multicenter crossover randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study analyzes early marginal bone modifications occurring around platform-switched implants with conical connection placed 1 or 2 mm subcrestally. METHODS: This crossover randomized controlled trial enrolled partially edentulous patients needing two implants in either the posterior maxilla or mandible. Each patient received two platform-switched implants with conical connection inserted 2 mm (Test) and 1 mm (Control) subcrestally. Definitive abutments were immediately connected and, after 4 months of unsubmerged healing, screwed metal-ceramic crowns were delivered. Radiographs were taken at implant placement (T0), prosthesis delivery (T1), and after 1 year of prosthetic loading (T2). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (25 males and 26 females; mean age 61.2 ± 12.1 years) totaling 102 implants were included in the final analysis. Mean peri-implant bone level (PBL) reduction from T0 to T2 was not significantly different around Test (0.49 ± 0.32 mm) and Control implants (0.46 ± 0.35 mm; p = 0.66). Multivariate linear regression models highlighted a significant positive correlation between history of periodontitis and PBL reduction. At T2, no Test group implant and 6 Control group implants exhibited PBL below the implant platform (11.8% of Control group implants). CONCLUSION: No significant differences in peri-implant marginal bone changes were demonstrated after 1 year of prosthetic loading between platform-switched implants with conical connection inserted either 1 or 2 mm subcrestally. However, 2 mm subcrestal placement resulted in deeper implant positioning at T2, with no exposure of treated implant surface and potential preventive effect against subsequent peri-implant pathology.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".