ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2026
Current treatment concepts in implantology in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The outcome of digital technology in microvascular free flap reconstruction for ORNJ: a retrospective study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDental implantology is a core competency of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS). However, detailed data on the current treatment concepts in implantology in OMFS in Germany are limited. This study analyzed current treatment concepts, clinical practices, decision-making factors, and the adoption of advanced technologies in implantology in OMFS in Germany. MATERIAL AND
methodsA dynamic online questionnaire with up to 38 questions was sent to 1391 OMFS members of the German Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (DGMKG). The questionnaire collected general and specific data, such as implantological experience, time points of implant placement (immediate vs. delayed), implant systems and designs, imaging modalities, digital planning, guided surgery, healing, (immediate) prosthetic restorations, follow-up, pre- and postoperative management, and the use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF). Data analysis was descriptive and anonymous.
results276 OMF surgeons participated in the study, with an average of 20 years of experience in implantology. Most worked in private practices without inpatient facilities (66.3%). Most placed 201-500 implants per year (34.78%). 78.99% performed immediate implant placement, mainly to shorten treatment time and preserve alveolar bone. Cone beam CT (88.42%) and panoramic radiographs (68.34%) were the most common imaging modalities. Virtual planning was used by 73.08%, and guided surgery was used by 66.54%, mainly with externally produced guides. Most participants preferred closed implant healing (83.53%). Immediate prosthetic restorations (PR) were rarely performed (57.83% never), and 70.92% did not carry out definitive PR. Risk factors for implant failure were poor oral hygiene (84.72%), limited surgical experience (76.39%), and smoking (75%). PRF was used routinely by 9.72%, and selectively by 45.83%
conclusionThe results indicate high implantological standards and heterogeneity in current treatment concepts in OMFS implantology in Germany. Possible reasons may include the surgeon's training and experience, the private practices' and clinics' organizational and structural features, and the referral network. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study underscores the importance of implantological education and training, interdisciplinary communication, and the further implementation of guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.