## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Studies** & **Types of Study** & **Subjects** & **Results** & **Other findings** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] and [PERSON] 2013[90]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Case series} & Four partially celebrations patients with seven implants of identical & ISQs ranging from 84 to 75 at implant placement & Mean marginal bone level around 0.35 to 0.71 \\  & & three-dimensional sensitivity vector & and increased to 108 to 81 at loading, by participants, & an at the cross placement and remarkably importantly \\  & & photo-associated activity with UV UV UV UV & implants with low primary stability multiball SQL & compared to the 0.53 mm in case year, with 70) showed large increase in ISQ during & compared to the marginal bone level that surpassed the marginal gradient evaluated by \\  & & measuring the increase in per month & loading. & Pepelized statistical analysis. \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. 2013[97] & cross-sectional retrospective analysis & \begin{tabular}{c} Total of 33 implants in 7 patients were fellow-up to 3 months, \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} Onsection integration assumed by ISO and OSI for all the implants, the ISQ at weeks was \\ for all the implants, the ISQ at weeks was \\ higher than ISQ at placement. \\ \end{tabular} & Comparison of ISQ (final) and ISQ (6 weeks) made based on the Intern Intern. ISQs runs from 65, and generally increased after week of delivering. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2013[95]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Retrospective analysis} & Retrospective analysis showed 2224 \\  & & connected to patients with 70 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients who received 15 patients over a fellow-up period of two & respectively. \\  & & and a half years. & & \\  & & and a half years. & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2014[98]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Case report} & \multirow{4}{*}{2 cases} & \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Confirmed hypothesis ofipients and \\ titanium mesh following exposure to UV light, \\ Radiotype evidence confirmed the \\ concentration for both cases \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{4}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Results showed satisfactory and \\ function following respondent to both with \\ implants at year follow-up. \\ \end{tabular} } \\  & Cross-sectional retrospective analysis & \begin{tabular}{c} 55 patients with ISOs less than 00 during \\ initial impairment placement were \\ followed-up for 2–3 years. \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} Average ISO (initial) 30.4 to 77 \\ Average ISO2 (unworthy) 74.3 \(\pm\) 57. \\ \end{tabular} & Overall increased in ISQ value during Stage 2 surgery \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2016[100]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Case-control (interogeneity)} & Total implants included: 25 photoautechnicalized & OSI were randomized in patients \(\pm\) 2.3 & \begin{tabular}{c} Input stability was evaluated by measuring \\ ISO at the placement (ISQ) and at the \\ stage-two surgery (ISO). \\ \end{tabular} \\  & & 24 as received and placed in regular or \\  & & & OSI for all the \"snowered\" implants \(\pm\) 2.0 & \begin{tabular}{c} Patient-induced hypothesis showed \\ significantly higher ISQ (user lighter than \\ confused in \"snowered\" implants \(\pm\) 5.3 \\ during placement surgery. \\ \end{tabular} \\  & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2018[101]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Retrospective analysis} & Total patients: 219 & Risk of early implant failure significantly & Postoperative wound breakdowns on the risk 0.25 \\  & & Total implants: 563 implants & reduced with OS \(\pm\) 0.30 & \begin{tabular}{c} Analyboard with OS \(\pm\) 0.21 \\ Implant failure at 10.3 (1s, expected to \\ of postoperative wound breakdowns during \\ building period 2/12), future without \\ production/snowered. \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} Analyboard with OS \(\pm\) 0.30 \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} Initial failure at 10.3 (1s, expected to \\ of postoperative wound breakdowns during \\ building period 2/12), future without \\ the breakdown of wound postoperatively. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{[PERSON] et al. 2019[91]} & \multirow{4}{*}{Clinical trial} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 13 patients underwent lumbar surgery, \\ age ranges from S5-d2 years old. \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Bone density evaluated vs computed \\ tomography scanning showed no difference in \\ both groups at any timepoint. \\ \end{tabular} & Carbon attachment was less in UV-tested \\  & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{ISQ = Implant Stability Quotient; CSI = Ossooooinformation Speed Index; OR = Odds Ratio} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}