Aleksandra Milić Lemić, Stefan Vulović, Aleksandar Jakovljević, Jelena Jaćimović, Frauke Müller, Sabrina Maniewicz, Marija S Milić, Aleksandra Popovac
{"title":"Analysis of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Single- and Two-Implant Mandibular Overdenture-An Umbrella Review.","authors":"Aleksandra Milić Lemić, Stefan Vulović, Aleksandar Jakovljević, Jelena Jaćimović, Frauke Müller, Sabrina Maniewicz, Marija S Milić, Aleksandra Popovac","doi":"10.1111/joor.13962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A two-implant mandibular overdenture (TIMO) is considered a viable approach for the rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible, enhancing retention, stability, overall function and patient-reported outcome. Recently, the minimalist strategy of single-implant mandibular overdenture (SIMO) was proposed as an alternative treatment for mandibular edentulism.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyse systematic reviews (SRs) and provide a comprehensive overview of clinical and patient-reported outcomes, including implant failure, peri-implant marginal bone loss, overall prosthetic complications and maintenance, patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life, in SIMO compared with TIMO.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The umbrella review was designed and reported following the PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024599304). Included SRs evaluated the clinical and/or patient-reported outcomes in edentulous patients rehabilitated with SIMO and TIMO. A literature search was conducted without restrictions on the language in Web of Science, ProQuest, SCIELO, KCI, Grants Index, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library databases. Critical evaluation of the included SRs was conducted using AMSTAR 2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 243 papers suitable for title/abstract screening, 7 SRs were selected. One SR favoured SIMO over TIMO for both implant failure and peri-implant marginal bone loss, whereas in another SR it was shown that TIMO revealed significantly more implant failures after 1 and 5 years, significantly more prosthetic failures after 1 year, and significantly more O-ring replacements after 5 years, compared to SIMO. Regarding the quality assessment of included SRs, two were categorised as 'critically low', two as 'low' and three as 'moderate'.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SIMO corresponds with the conventional TIMO as a potentially effective treatment for the rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible. Additional studies are warranted to obtain more robust patient evidence and refine clinical guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":16605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13962","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
Background: A two-implant mandibular overdenture (TIMO) is considered a viable approach for the rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible, enhancing retention, stability, overall function and patient-reported outcome. Recently, the minimalist strategy of single-implant mandibular overdenture (SIMO) was proposed as an alternative treatment for mandibular edentulism.
Objectives: To analyse systematic reviews (SRs) and provide a comprehensive overview of clinical and patient-reported outcomes, including implant failure, peri-implant marginal bone loss, overall prosthetic complications and maintenance, patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life, in SIMO compared with TIMO.
Methods: The umbrella review was designed and reported following the PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024599304). Included SRs evaluated the clinical and/or patient-reported outcomes in edentulous patients rehabilitated with SIMO and TIMO. A literature search was conducted without restrictions on the language in Web of Science, ProQuest, SCIELO, KCI, Grants Index, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library databases. Critical evaluation of the included SRs was conducted using AMSTAR 2.
Results: Out of 243 papers suitable for title/abstract screening, 7 SRs were selected. One SR favoured SIMO over TIMO for both implant failure and peri-implant marginal bone loss, whereas in another SR it was shown that TIMO revealed significantly more implant failures after 1 and 5 years, significantly more prosthetic failures after 1 year, and significantly more O-ring replacements after 5 years, compared to SIMO. Regarding the quality assessment of included SRs, two were categorised as 'critically low', two as 'low' and three as 'moderate'.
Conclusions: SIMO corresponds with the conventional TIMO as a potentially effective treatment for the rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible. Additional studies are warranted to obtain more robust patient evidence and refine clinical guidelines.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation aims to be the most prestigious journal of dental research within all aspects of oral rehabilitation and applied oral physiology. It covers all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to re-establish a subjective and objective harmonious oral function.
Oral rehabilitation may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, orofacial traumas, or a variety of dental and oral diseases (primarily dental caries and periodontal diseases) and orofacial pain conditions. As such, oral rehabilitation in the twenty-first century is a matter of skilful diagnosis and minimal, appropriate intervention, the nature of which is intimately linked to a profound knowledge of oral physiology, oral biology, and dental and oral pathology.
The scientific content of the journal therefore strives to reflect the best of evidence-based clinical dentistry. Modern clinical management should be based on solid scientific evidence gathered about diagnostic procedures and the properties and efficacy of the chosen intervention (e.g. material science, biological, toxicological, pharmacological or psychological aspects). The content of the journal also reflects documentation of the possible side-effects of rehabilitation, and includes prognostic perspectives of the treatment modalities chosen.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
