Influence of Implant Surfaces on Peri-Implant Diseases - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Ahmad Hussein, Maanas Shah, Momen A Atieh, Sara Alhimairi, Fatemeh Amir-Rad, Haitham Elbishari
{"title":"Influence of Implant Surfaces on Peri-Implant Diseases - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Ahmad Hussein, Maanas Shah, Momen A Atieh, Sara Alhimairi, Fatemeh Amir-Rad, Haitham Elbishari","doi":"10.1016/j.identj.2024.10.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current literature on the effect of implant surface characteristics on peri-implant marginal bone levels (MBL), soft tissue periodontal parameters, peri-implantitis, and implant failure rates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials were searched in electronic databases. Risk of bias within the selected studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias Tool 2. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager software for studies with similar comparisons reporting same outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten randomized control trials were included in the present review. The primary outcome of changes in peri-implant MBL favoured implants with machined surfaces, however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .18). The changes in probing pocket depths significantly favoured the use of machined surfaces (P = .01), while the implant failure rates favoured roughened surface implants. However, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .09).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Machined surface implants were favoured in terms of lesser peri-implant MBL, though the difference was not significant. The analysis also demonstrated limited favourable outcomes in terms of periodontal parameters for machined surfaces, with slightly significantly better outcomes in terms of probing pocket depths. However, rough surface implants tended to display a lower implant failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":13785,"journal":{"name":"International dental journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.10.007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current literature on the effect of implant surface characteristics on peri-implant marginal bone levels (MBL), soft tissue periodontal parameters, peri-implantitis, and implant failure rates.

Materials and methods: Randomized controlled trials were searched in electronic databases. Risk of bias within the selected studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias Tool 2. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager software for studies with similar comparisons reporting same outcome measures.

Results: Ten randomized control trials were included in the present review. The primary outcome of changes in peri-implant MBL favoured implants with machined surfaces, however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .18). The changes in probing pocket depths significantly favoured the use of machined surfaces (P = .01), while the implant failure rates favoured roughened surface implants. However, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .09).

Conclusion: Machined surface implants were favoured in terms of lesser peri-implant MBL, though the difference was not significant. The analysis also demonstrated limited favourable outcomes in terms of periodontal parameters for machined surfaces, with slightly significantly better outcomes in terms of probing pocket depths. However, rough surface implants tended to display a lower implant failure.

种植体表面对种植体周围疾病的影响--系统回顾与元分析。
研究目的本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估目前有关种植体表面特征对种植体周围边缘骨水平(MBL)、软组织牙周参数、种植体周围炎和种植失败率的影响的文献:在电子数据库中搜索了随机对照试验。使用偏倚风险工具 2 评估了所选研究的偏倚风险。使用Review Manager软件对报告相同结果指标的相似比较研究进行了元分析:本综述共纳入了 10 项随机对照试验。种植体周围 MBL 的变化这一主要结果更倾向于采用机加工表面的种植体,但差异无统计学意义(P = .18)。探查袋深度的变化明显有利于使用加工表面的种植体(P = .01),而种植失败率则有利于粗糙表面的种植体。然而,两者之间的差异并无统计学意义(P = .09):结论:机加工表面种植体的种植体周围 MBL 较少,但差异不显著。分析还显示,机械加工表面在牙周参数方面的优势有限,在探查袋深度方面的优势略微明显。不过,粗糙表面种植体的失败率较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International dental journal
International dental journal 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
6.10%
发文量
159
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍: The International Dental Journal features peer-reviewed, scientific articles relevant to international oral health issues, as well as practical, informative articles aimed at clinicians.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信