ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2026
Failure of Wide-Diameter Dental Implants (Predominantly 5.0 mm) Show Distinct Risk Profiles-A Large Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
aimTo evaluate survival rates and identify temporally distinct risk factors for early and late failure of wide-diameter dental implants (≥ 5.0 mm) in a large real-world cohort using landmark analysis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed 12 041 wide-diameter implants (≥ 5.0 mm), predominantly 5.0 mm, placed in 9247 patients at a single center between January 2014 and December 2023. Implant survival was defined as the fixture remaining in situ without clinical loss or replacement at the same site. Failures were classified as early (≤ 1 year) or late (> 1 year). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model clustered by patient were generated. Schoenfeld residuals revealed time-varying effects for penicillin allergy, implant length, and kidney disease, prompting a landmark analysis at 365 days with separate multivariable logistic regression models for early and late failure.
resultsOverall implant survival was 97.5%. Kaplan-Meier estimates were 98.1% (95% CI: 97.9%-98.4%) at 1 year, 97.8% (95% CI: 97.5%-98.0%) at 3 years, and 97.6% (95% CI: 97.4%-97.9%) at 5 years. Of 301 failures, 225 (74.8%) were early and 76 (25.2%) were late. In the Cox model, short implants (≤ 8 mm; HR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.43-2.62, p < 0.001), maxillary placement (HR = 2.13 vs. mandible, p < 0.001), male sex (HR = 1.39, p = 0.010), penicillin allergy (HR = 1.66, p = 0.014), and older age (HR = 0.84 per SD, p = 0.008) independently predicted failure; smoking was borderline (HR = 1.33, p = 0.065). Landmark analysis showed that early failure was driven by penicillin allergy (OR = 2.26, p < 0.001), maxillary placement (OR = 2.42, p < 0.001), male sex (OR = 1.40, p = 0.016), and short length (OR = 1.70, p = 0.007), whereas late failure was driven by short length (OR = 3.19, p < 0.001) and kidney disease (OR = 6.11, p = 0.003).
conclusionsWide-diameter implants achieve excellent long-term survival. Early and late failures arise from distinct mechanisms: perioperative, anatomical, and sex-related factors predominate early, while short implant length and renal disease predominate late. These findings support tailored perioperative protocols, individualized risk stratification, and targeted long-term surveillance.
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.