Primary study · included by 1 review

A two-year prospective study to compare the peri-implant parameters of posterior implant-supported single crowns with and without mesial proximal contact loss

Ko 2024 · Ko Kai-Wen, Cheng Chih-Wen, Hsu Yu-Jui, et al. · Journal of Dental Sciences · 2024

Included by

Impact of Open Proximal Contacts on Peri-Implant Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Non-Cochrane · prognostic · 2026 · cited as Ko 2024 · Table 2; Figure 3; reference list
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Changes in marginal bone levels (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration
MD 0.03 [-0.08, 0.14]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Changes in marginal bone levels (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration
MD 0.16 [-0.08, 0.39]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Changes in marginal bone levels (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration · Follow-up 24 to 84 months
MD 0.07 [-0.09, 0.24]4 studies · 4697 participantsVery low
Changes in probing pocket depths (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration · Follow-up 24 to 60 months
MD 0.11 [-0.29, 0.51]3 studies · 372 participantsVery low
Changes in marginal bone levels (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration
MD 0.04 [-0.15, 0.24]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Changes in marginal bone levels (mm)
Open proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration vs Closed proximal contact adjacent to implant restoration
MD 0.15 [-0.18, 0.48]3 studiesGRADE not reported

1 including review in total.