Clinical Oral Implants Research最新文献

{"title":"Premature Bone Resorption in Vertical Ridge Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials.","authors":"Faisal Faihan Alotaibi, Jacopo Buti, Isabella Rocchietta, Nor Shafina Mohamed Nazari, Rawan Almujaydil, Francesco D'Aiuto","doi":"10.1111/clr.14435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14435","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically appraise the evidence on premature ridge resorption following various vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) techniques in healthy adult patients undergoing staged VRA procedures. The study aimed to identify VRA techniques resulting in the least premature bone resorption and to rank them using Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis (NMA).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Searches were conducted in six databases to identify randomised clinical trials (RCT) comparing staged VRA techniques with a minimum of 3 months follow-up. Relative premature bone resorption (PBR%) overall (primary) and in sites with uneventful versus complicated healing and need for additional bone grafting (NAG) (secondary) were chosen as outcomes. The risk of bias and certainty in evidence were assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 and GRADE tools. Bayesian models estimated treatment effects and rankings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten RCTs, involving 220 participants and 236 defects, were included. Nine RCTs reported mean PBR%, with a range from 6% to 44%, averaging 26%. Seven treatment groups were evaluated: onlay, onlay + barrier, inlay, guided bone regeneration, distraction osteogenesis (DO), tissue expansion + tunnelling (TET), and cortical tenting. Eight RCTs, involving 160 participants and 176 defects, contributed to the NMA. Compared to onlay, all groups had lower mean PBR%. Inlay had the highest probability of being ranked first (Pr = 0.55), followed by DO (Pr = 0.27) and TET (Pr = 0.15). Healing complications significantly increased PBR% (MD 10%, 95% CrI 4.4-15.7).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VRA techniques preserving the periosteum (inlay, DO, and TET) exhibit less PBR compared with other techniques. When techniques involve full flap elevation, clinicians should anticipate volume loss at re-entry and consider greater grafting volumes to offset PBR. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42023394396; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=394396.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143669331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction to \"Low-Dose, Standard, and High-Resolution Cone Beam Computed Tomography for Alveolar Bone Measurements Related to Implant Planning: An Ex Vivo Study in Human Specimens.","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/clr.14434","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14434","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143656286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Increase at Small Buccal Bone Dehiscences With Either Volume-Stable Collagen Matrix or Connective Tissue Graft: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Ferrarotti Francesco, Baima Giacomo, Mohammadi Giulia, Carboncini Clelia, Romano Federica, Aimetti Mario","doi":"10.1111/clr.14430","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14430","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This randomized clinical study compared the profilometric measurements of the buccal tissue volume at sites augmented using a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) or connective tissue graft (CTG) simultaneously to implant placement in the presence of small buccal bone dehiscence (SBBD ≤ 3 mm).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-four patients with SBBD were treated with soft tissue augmentation (STA) simultaneous to implant placement using VCMX or SCTG. Clinical measurements and 3D intraoral scans were collected prior to STA (BL), at 1, 3 months, and 1 year after prosthetic loading. Digital files were superimposed to compare profilometric volume on the buccal profile (primary outcome); peri-implant health, radiographic bone levels, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both treatments achieved a significant STA at 3 months, with a slight decrease observed from 1 month. At 3 months, the mean increase was 1.07 mm (SD 0.22) for VCMX and 1.22 mm (SD 0.44) for the CTG group (p = 0.156). PROMs revealed a difference in the perception of the bleeding at day 1, pain at 2 and 3 days, and swelling at 3 days favoring VCMX (p < 0.05). At 1 year, no intergroup difference in probing pocket depth, bleeding, and recession was detected, but CTG provided higher stability than VCMX in terms of profilometric measurements (0.21 mm [SD 0.32] vs. -0.05 mm [SD 0.36], respectively; p = 0.014) and radiographic bone levels (0.09 mm [SD 0.65] vs. -0.34 mm [SD 0.70]; p = 0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For implant placement at posterior sites with small buccal bone dehiscences, CTG and VCMX resulted in an initially comparable volume augmentation and clinical parameters, with VCMX leading to better PROMs. At 1 year, CTG maintained slightly higher profilometric stability and bone levels.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05466006 (https://classic.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov/ct2/show/NCT05466006).</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143656290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patient-Reported Outcomes With Immediate-Loaded Zygomatic Implant Fixed Rehabilitation in Patients With Edentulous Atrophic Maxilla: A Retrospective Practice-Based Clinical Study.","authors":"Anisha Rodrigues, Samer Abi Nader, Nach Daniel, Elham Emami","doi":"10.1111/clr.14432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14432","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess if immediate-loaded zygomatic implant-supported fixed rehabilitation meets the expectations of and satisfies patients with atrophic edentulous maxilla.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included an analysis of data obtained from the dental records of 22 consecutive patients with atrophic edentulous maxillae who received immediate-loaded zygomatic implant-supported fixed rehabilitation between 2017 and 2020. Patients' expectations and satisfaction scores were recorded on a validated 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed a majority of patients had high expectations (VAS > 90) of the rehabilitation with regard to their general satisfaction (71%), aesthetics (71%), chewing (66%), speech (66%), and influence on social life (81%). At 6 months, a majority of the patients showed high general satisfaction (72%), and high satisfaction with aesthetics (77%), chewing (72%), speech (66%), and social life (72%) (VAS > 90). There was a statistically significant increase in the level of satisfaction with chewing from 2 weeks to 6 months after immediate loading (B = 0.309, SE = 0.138, 95% CI: 0.038, 0.580, p = 0.025). A statistically significant association was found between pre-treatment expectations and satisfaction with the rehabilitation's impact on speech, aesthetics, and social life. The satisfaction levels were not influenced by age and sex. All participants agreed that they would recommend this procedure to their peers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this study suggest that immediate-loaded zygomatic implant-supported fixed rehabilitation could meet the expectations and satisfy edentulous patients with atrophic maxilla.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143656288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With Autogenous Bone Versus Bovine Bone Mineral Mixed With 25% Autogenous Bone: A 1‐Year Multicenter, Split‐Mouth, Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Anouck Jue, Justin Pijpe, Eppo Wolvius, Nadja Naenni, Franz J. Strauss, Brend Jonker","doi":"10.1111/clr.14431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14431","url":null,"abstract":"ObjectivesTo compare autogenous bone (AB) harvested from the mandibular ramus or a mixture of bovine bone mineral (BBM) with 25% locally harvested autogenous bone chips from the maxilla for maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA).Material and MethodsPatients requiring bilateral MSFA and implant placement were enrolled in this study. Maxillary sinuses were randomly assigned (1:1) to one of the two groups: MSFA + AB (AB group) or MSFA + AB + BBM (BBM group). AB was harvested from the mandible (AB group) or locally during MSFA (BBM group). Implants were placed after 4–6 months of healing and loaded 4–6 months later. Patients were examined at baseline (1 month post‐loading) and 12 months post‐loading. Outcome measures included clinician‐ and patient‐reported outcomes.ResultsFifty patients with 198 implants were included (AB = 99, BBM = 99). Twelve implants failed before loading (AB = 6, BBM = 6), and three failed post‐loading (AB = 2, BBM = 1). Implant survival was 92.9% (AB group) and 93.9% (BBM group) at 12 months post‐loading, with no significant differences between the groups (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.28–2.54; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.770). Implant success was 98.8% (AB group) and 97.6% (BBM group), with no significant differences between the groups (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.03–8.05; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.620). No significant differences in marginal bone loss or clinical parameters were found between groups (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &gt; 0.05). Patient satisfaction significantly improved at follow‐ups compared to screening (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.005).ConclusionImplants placed after MSFA with AB or BBM showed comparable results. This indicates that MSFA can be successfully performed without requiring AB from an additional donor site, potentially reducing patient morbidity.Trial RegistrationThis study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register with number NL59578.078.16 on 09‐05‐2017. The study start date was on 21‐08‐2017","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143635686","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Tenting Screw Technique for Horizontal Alveolar Bone Augmentation in the Anterior Maxilla: A 1‐ to 5‐Year Retrospective Study","authors":"Siyuan Wang, Xiaoyu Chen, Weijie Wu, Zhaoting Ling, Sijia Yang, Xiaoting Shen, Fuming He","doi":"10.1111/clr.14428","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14428","url":null,"abstract":"ObjectivesTo evaluate the 1‐ to 5‐year outcomes of dental implants placed with the tenting screw (TS) technique and to compare their clinical efficacy with conventional guided bone regeneration (GBR).MethodsThis retrospective study involved implants placed with TS or conventional GBR technique. Horizontal and volumetric bone gains were evaluated by reconstructing cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) data. Complications, biological parameters, esthetic scores, and patients' satisfaction were recorded.ResultsA total of 75 implants in 42 patients (20 defect sites in TS group and 22 in GBR group) were included in this study. With a 1‐ to 5‐year follow‐up, no implants failed, resulting in a 100% implant survival rate. After healing periods, the TS group demonstrated horizontal bone gains of 2.85 ± 1.42 mm, 3.37 ± 1.79 mm, and 3.27 ± 1.68 mm at 1, 3, and 5 mm below the implant shoulder, significantly exceeding the GBR group (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.009, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.002, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.002, respectively). Consistently, three‐dimensional volumetric bone resorption rates for the TS and GBR groups after healing periods were 16.5% and 29.3% (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001), increasing to 36.7% and 50.7% after follow‐up periods (<jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001). The overall PPDs in the TS group were significantly smaller than those in the GBR group (2.50 (2.25, 2.50) mm vs. 2.50 (2.25, 2.75) mm, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.038). No other significant differences were observed in terms of peri‐implant soft tissue health, esthetics, and patients' satisfaction.ConclusionsConsidering the superior bone augmentation outcomes and comparable peri‐implant soft tissue health, esthetics, and patient satisfaction to the conventional GBR technique, the tenting screw technique emerges as a reliable treatment option for reconstructing atrophic alveolar ridges in the anterior maxilla.","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"183 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143640851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Intelligence in Presurgical Implant Planning: A Preclinical Validation.","authors":"Bahaaeldeen M Elgarba, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Xijin Du, Sorana Mureșanu, Mihai Tarce, Jan Meeus, Reinhilde Jacobs","doi":"10.1111/clr.14429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14429","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To validate an innovative artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tool for automated virtual implant placement by comparing its accuracy, implant dimension selection, time efficiency, and consistency with a human intelligence (HI)-based approach for single posterior tooth replacement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A dataset of 50 time-matched cone-beam computed tomography and intraoral scans with a single missing posterior mandibular tooth was selected to validate a pre-trained AI model for virtual implant placement against a HI-based approach. A quantitative comparison of implant location and implant dimension selection was conducted between AI and HI, and a qualitative three-dimensional evaluation was conducted by three implant dentistry specialists using a visual analog scale and a Turing test to assess and distinguish between AI and HI. Additionally, time consumption and consistency were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Experts found that approximately 89% of AI-planned and 93% of HI-planned implants were clinically acceptable, with the planning method unidentifiable in 58% of AI cases. AI selected implant dimensions of 11.7 mm (1.3) in length and 4.0 mm (0.3) in diameter, close to experts' selections of 11.5 mm (1.3) and 4.2 mm (0.4). AI was over twice as fast, reducing planning time to 187 s (34) compared to 406 s (68) for HI (p < 0.0001), and demonstrated high consistency with a median surface deviation (MSD) of zero, while intra- and inter-operator MSDs were 0.33 mm (0.14) and 0.56 mm (0.34), respectively (p < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Artificial intelligence is reliable for virtual implant placement in missing mandibular (pre)molars, producing clinically acceptable plans comparable to human experts while operating faster and much more consistently than implant clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143623715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Potential Biomarkers Indicating Resistance or Resilience in Experimental Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Aldrin André Huamán-Mendoza, Guilherme Castro Lima Silva do Amaral, Nathalia Vilela, Casimira Valeria Chuquimez-Ventura, Emanuel Silva Rovai, Giuseppe Alexandre Romito, Claudio Mendes Pannuti, Cristina Cunha Villar, Marinella Holzhausen","doi":"10.1111/clr.14427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14427","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify changes in immunological, microbiological, and histological biomarkers that may indicate resistance during the induction phase and resilience during the resolution phase of experimental peri-implant mucositis (PiM).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases. Prospective interventional studies assessing biomarkers during experimental PiM were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models. The GRADE approach was used to determine the certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven out of 6008 studies were included. Clinical parameters (mPI and mGI) effectively characterized the experimental PiM model. Due to methodological variability and conflicting results, a definitive interpretation of microbiological and histological biomarkers was not possible. The meta-analysis revealed that IL-1β and the volume of peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) indicated non-resistance during the induction phase. In contrast, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, MMP-8, and IFN-γ remained stable. Regarding the resolution phase, IL-1β returned to baseline levels (SMD: 1.13; 95% CI: -0.81, 3.06), and the volume of PICF (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.13) remained significantly elevated compared to day 0. However, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, MMP-8, and IFN-γ did not significantly differ from baseline levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Moderate to very low evidence suggested that the biomarkers IL-1β and the volume of PICF indicated a lack of resistance while suggesting resilience and non-resilience, respectively. The biomarkers TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, MMP-8, and IFN-γ demonstrated resistance and resilience.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143613775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction to \"Mucosal Adhesion Phenomenon After Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Preclinical Study\".","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/clr.14417","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14417","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143604188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evolution in the Peri-Implant Oral Microbiome and Their Relationship to Long-Term Marginal Bone Loss: A Randomized Clinical Study.","authors":"Pablo Galindo-Moreno, Lourdes Gutierrez-Garrido, Juan Duarte, Iñaki Robles-Vera, Natividad Martin-Morales, Francisco O'Valle, Allinson Olaechea, Ana Belén Carrillo-Galvez, Miguel Padial-Molina","doi":"10.1111/clr.14426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14426","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze the clinical, radiographic, and microbiological changes around implants with a multiphosphonate-treated surface, prosthetically loaded with two different protocols after 5 years of functional loading.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A randomized clinical trial was designed to initiate prosthetic loading over single dental implants after 8 (control) or 4 weeks (test). Several variables were analyzed, including patients' level variables, intrasulcular biofilm, and marginal bone level at several time points, from 1 to 60 months after loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 23 patients attended the 5-year follow-up visit. No clinical variable changed over time, except mucosal thickness from dental impressions to prosthesis delivery. No significant radiographic differences were observed either over time or between groups. Microbiologically, there was a change in the microbiome from the constitution of the biological width to the final follow-up. Seven species changed significantly, with a significant increase in Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia from 12 to 60 months and a decrease in the other species. However, changes in the relative abundance of species over time, whether increasing or decreasing, did not show a correlation with marginal bone loss.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implants with a multiphosphonate-treated surface showed no differences in clinical and radiographic variables after 5 years of function, regardless of the prosthetic loading protocol used. From a microbiological point of view, although there was an evolution of the microbiome in the peri-implant sulcus towards Socransky's red circle pathogenic bacteria, no microorganism showed a significant correlation with the radiographic changes produced in the peri-implant bone over time.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03059108.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143584993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}