Ahmad Al Malak, Yasmina El Masri, Jad El Masri, Hassan Al Issawi, Pascale Salameh, Georges Aoun
{"title":"Implant Failure and Marginal Bone Loss Between Axial and Tilted Implants: An Umbrella Review with Meta-analysis.","authors":"Ahmad Al Malak, Yasmina El Masri, Jad El Masri, Hassan Al Issawi, Pascale Salameh, Georges Aoun","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To summarize and analyze all the evidence available concerning marginal bone loss (MBL) and implant failure between tilted and axial implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An electronic literature search was conducted without any language restrictions, and only systematic reviews with meta-analysis or meta-analysis studies were included. Relative risks (RRs) and the differences in mean (MD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the assessed outcomes (in mm) of implant failure and MBL.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, eight studies were included. Based on the short-term results, a nonsignificant mean difference (MD = 0.00; 95% CI; -0.01-0.02; P value = .75) was recorded between tilted and axial implants supporting full-arch dentures. A significant mean difference was recorded at 3-year follow-up (MD = 0.08 95% CI= 0.05-0.11; P value < .00001) and at long-term follow-up (MD = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.15-0.20; P value < .00001). A nonsignificant difference was observed between tilted and axial implants regarding implant failure (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.85-1.23;P value = .81).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the high- and moderate-quality studies with low risk of bias included in this review, no significant difference in outcome regarding implant failure was observed between tilted and axial implants supporting full-arch or fixed partial dentures.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"875-883"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10885","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To summarize and analyze all the evidence available concerning marginal bone loss (MBL) and implant failure between tilted and axial implants.
Materials and methods: An electronic literature search was conducted without any language restrictions, and only systematic reviews with meta-analysis or meta-analysis studies were included. Relative risks (RRs) and the differences in mean (MD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the assessed outcomes (in mm) of implant failure and MBL.
Results: In total, eight studies were included. Based on the short-term results, a nonsignificant mean difference (MD = 0.00; 95% CI; -0.01-0.02; P value = .75) was recorded between tilted and axial implants supporting full-arch dentures. A significant mean difference was recorded at 3-year follow-up (MD = 0.08 95% CI= 0.05-0.11; P value < .00001) and at long-term follow-up (MD = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.15-0.20; P value < .00001). A nonsignificant difference was observed between tilted and axial implants regarding implant failure (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.85-1.23;P value = .81).
Conclusions: Based on the high- and moderate-quality studies with low risk of bias included in this review, no significant difference in outcome regarding implant failure was observed between tilted and axial implants supporting full-arch or fixed partial dentures.