Single vs two implant-retained overdentures for edentulous mandibles: a systematic review.

Q1 Dentistry
Ahmed Yaseen Alqutaibi, Marco Esposito, Radwan Algabri, Adnan Alfahad, Amal Kaddah, Mohammed Farouk, Ali Alsourori
{"title":"Single vs two implant-retained overdentures for edentulous mandibles: a systematic review.","authors":"Ahmed Yaseen Alqutaibi,&nbsp;Marco Esposito,&nbsp;Radwan Algabri,&nbsp;Adnan Alfahad,&nbsp;Amal Kaddah,&nbsp;Mohammed Farouk,&nbsp;Ali Alsourori","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare prosthesis and implant failure, patient satisfaction, prosthetic complications and peri-implant marginal bone loss of mandibular overdentures (IOD) supported by a single or two implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Manual and electronic database (PubMed and Cochrane) searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials, without language restriction, comparing single vs two implant supported mandibular overdentures. Two investigators extracted data independently. The Cochrane tool was used for assessing the quality of included studies. Meta-analyses were performed for the included RCTs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six publications corresponding to four RCTs were identified. Three RCTs (corresponding to five publications) were included and one trial was excluded. Follow-ups in function were 1, 3 and 5 years after loading. All included studies were considered to be at a high risk of bias. The pooled result revealed more prosthesis failures at overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02), however, there were non-significant differences at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.22; Risk Difference: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.83, 0.19) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.24). Regarding implant failures, there were more implant losses in overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: -0.15, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.02), however, there were non-significant difference at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.2; Risk Difference: -0.33, 95% CI: -0.84, 0.18). After 5 years in function, meta-analyses revealed that there were non-significant differences regarding overall prosthetic complications when mandibular overdentures supported by a single implant were compared with overdentures supported by two implants (P = 0.43; RD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.06, 0.15).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mandibular overdentures retained by a single implant have comparable results to those retained by two implants. However, this should be interpreted with caution as all the included studies were considered at a high risk of bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":49259,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":"10 3","pages":"243-261"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare prosthesis and implant failure, patient satisfaction, prosthetic complications and peri-implant marginal bone loss of mandibular overdentures (IOD) supported by a single or two implants.

Materials and methods: Manual and electronic database (PubMed and Cochrane) searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials, without language restriction, comparing single vs two implant supported mandibular overdentures. Two investigators extracted data independently. The Cochrane tool was used for assessing the quality of included studies. Meta-analyses were performed for the included RCTs.

Results: Six publications corresponding to four RCTs were identified. Three RCTs (corresponding to five publications) were included and one trial was excluded. Follow-ups in function were 1, 3 and 5 years after loading. All included studies were considered to be at a high risk of bias. The pooled result revealed more prosthesis failures at overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02), however, there were non-significant differences at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.22; Risk Difference: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.83, 0.19) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.24). Regarding implant failures, there were more implant losses in overdentures supported by two implants at 1 year (three trials) (P = 0.02; Risk Difference: -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22, -0.02) and at 5 years (one trial) (P = 0.95; Risk Difference: -0.15, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.02), however, there were non-significant difference at 3 years (two trials) (P = 0.2; Risk Difference: -0.33, 95% CI: -0.84, 0.18). After 5 years in function, meta-analyses revealed that there were non-significant differences regarding overall prosthetic complications when mandibular overdentures supported by a single implant were compared with overdentures supported by two implants (P = 0.43; RD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.06, 0.15).

Conclusion: Mandibular overdentures retained by a single implant have comparable results to those retained by two implants. However, this should be interpreted with caution as all the included studies were considered at a high risk of bias.

单牙与双牙种植覆盖义齿用于无牙下颌骨:一项系统综述。
目的:比较单种植和双种植下颌覆盖义齿的修复失败、患者满意度、修复并发症和种植周缘骨丢失情况。材料和方法:使用人工和电子数据库(PubMed和Cochrane)进行检索,以确定随机对照试验,没有语言限制,比较单个和两个种植支撑下颌覆盖义齿。两名调查人员独立提取数据。Cochrane工具用于评估纳入研究的质量。对纳入的随机对照试验进行meta分析。结果:确定了与4项rct相对应的6篇出版物。纳入3项随机对照试验(对应5篇出版物),排除1项试验。功能随访分别为加载后1年、3年和5年。所有纳入的研究都被认为存在高偏倚风险。汇总结果显示,两种种植体支持的覆盖义齿在1年内出现了更多的修复失败(3次试验)(P = 0.02;风险差异:-0.12,95% CI: -0.22, -0.02),然而,3年(2项试验)无显著差异(P = 0.22;风险差异:-0.32,95% CI: -0.83, 0.19)和5年(1次试验)(P = 0.95;风险差异:0.01,95% CI: -0.22, 0.24)。在种植失败方面,两种种植体支持的覆盖义齿在1年内有更多的种植体损失(3项试验)(P = 0.02;风险差异:-0.12,95% CI: -0.22, -0.02)和5年(1次试验)(P = 0.95;风险差异:-0.15,95% CI: -0.28, -0.02),然而,3年(2项试验)无显著差异(P = 0.2;风险差异:-0.33,95% CI: -0.84, 0.18)。功能恢复5年后,荟萃分析显示,单种植体支持的下颌覆盖义齿与双种植体支持的下颌覆盖义齿相比,总体义齿并发症无显著差异(P = 0.43;Rd: 0.04, 95% ci: -0.06, 0.15)。结论:单种植体固位的下颌覆盖义齿与双种植体固位的效果相当。然而,这应该谨慎解释,因为所有纳入的研究都被认为具有高偏倚风险。
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
European Journal of Oral Implantology
European Journal of Oral Implantology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.35
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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