Eliezer Haimov, Rafael Sarikov, Haim Haimov, Gintaras Juodzbalys
{"title":"Differences in Titanium, Titanium-Zirconium, Zirconia Implants Treatment Outcomes: a Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Eliezer Haimov, Rafael Sarikov, Haim Haimov, Gintaras Juodzbalys","doi":"10.5037/jomr.2023.14301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this systematic review is to test the hypothesis that treatment with titanium, titanium-zirconium and zirconia dental implants has different clinical outcomes in survival rate, marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, plaque control record, and probing depth.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic electronic search through the PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify studies published between January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2023 containing a minimum of 10 patients per study comparing titanium (Ti), titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr), and zirconia (Zr) dental implants. Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr dental implant clinical outcomes were determined by evaluating survival rate, marginal bone level, bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque control record. Quality and risk-of-bias assessment were evaluated by Cochrane risk of bias tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1361 articles were screened, with 10 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 301 patients with 637 implants (304 Ti, 134 Ti-Zr, and 199 Zr) were evaluated, showing a survival rate of 97.7% for Ti, 98.6% for Ti-Zr, and 93.8% for Zr implants respectively. In a meta-analysis, no difference in marginal bone level was found between Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr implants (P = 0.84).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dental implant survival rate was lower in zirconia group. Assessment of marginal bone loss and bleeding on probing showed better results with titanium-zirconium dental implants. Plaque control result was similar in all groups. Due to limited sample size assessed it was not possible to obtain conclusion on probing depth parameter.</p>","PeriodicalId":53254,"journal":{"name":"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research","volume":"14 3","pages":"e1"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10645476/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eJournal of Oral Maxillofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2023.14301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this systematic review is to test the hypothesis that treatment with titanium, titanium-zirconium and zirconia dental implants has different clinical outcomes in survival rate, marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, plaque control record, and probing depth.
Material and methods: A systematic electronic search through the PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify studies published between January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2023 containing a minimum of 10 patients per study comparing titanium (Ti), titanium-zirconium (Ti-Zr), and zirconia (Zr) dental implants. Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr dental implant clinical outcomes were determined by evaluating survival rate, marginal bone level, bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque control record. Quality and risk-of-bias assessment were evaluated by Cochrane risk of bias tool.
Results: A total of 1361 articles were screened, with 10 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 301 patients with 637 implants (304 Ti, 134 Ti-Zr, and 199 Zr) were evaluated, showing a survival rate of 97.7% for Ti, 98.6% for Ti-Zr, and 93.8% for Zr implants respectively. In a meta-analysis, no difference in marginal bone level was found between Ti, Ti-Zr, and Zr implants (P = 0.84).
Conclusions: Dental implant survival rate was lower in zirconia group. Assessment of marginal bone loss and bleeding on probing showed better results with titanium-zirconium dental implants. Plaque control result was similar in all groups. Due to limited sample size assessed it was not possible to obtain conclusion on probing depth parameter.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
