Platform switch and dental implants: A meta-analysis

A randomized controlled clinical trial assessing initial crestal bone remodeling of implants with a different surface roughness

“…The hybrid surface has the advantage of being moderately rough along the implant body, which promotes osseointegration 24 and minimally rough around the implant neck, which is suggested to be less susceptible to develop peri-implantitis on the long term, especially in high-risk patients. 17 [26][27][28] In the present study, one patient showed extensive crestal bone loss beyond the normal bone remodeling, at both the MSC (1.75 mm) and DCC implant (3.93 mm), 3 months post-implant placement. In the present study, no difference in initial crestal bone loss was found between the MSC and the DCC implant after a follow-up of at least 1 year.…”

Smoking and dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…First of all, all confounding factors may have affected the long-term outcomes and not just the fact that implants were placed in smokers or nonsmokers, and the impact of these variables on the implant survival rate, postoperative infection, and marginal bone loss [131][132][133][134][135][136][137][138] is difficult to estimate if these confounding factors are not identified separately between the two different procedures in order to perform a meta-regression analysis. The studies included here have a considerable number of confounding factors, and most of the studies, if not all, did not inform how many implant were inserted and survived/lost in several different conditions.…”

Effect of platform switching on crestal bone levels around implants in the posterior mandible: 3 years results from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

“…(2012) and Chrcanovic et al. (2015) but are less prone to incur in type I errors (incorrect rejection of the null hypothesis) due to the increased number of patients recruited (independent statistical units).…”