Prosthetic Rehabilitation of the Partially Edentulous Atrophic Posterior Mandible with Short Implants (≤ 8 mm) Compared with the Sandwich Osteotomy and Delayed Placement of Standard Length Implants (> 8 mm): a Systematic Review.

Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research Pub Date : 2018-06-29 eCollection Date: 2018-04-01 DOI:10.5037/jomr.2018.9202
Thomas Starch-Jensen, Helle Baungaard Nielsen
{"title":"Prosthetic Rehabilitation of the Partially Edentulous Atrophic Posterior Mandible with Short Implants (≤ 8 mm) Compared with the Sandwich Osteotomy and Delayed Placement of Standard Length Implants (> 8 mm): a Systematic Review.","authors":"Thomas Starch-Jensen,&nbsp;Helle Baungaard Nielsen","doi":"10.5037/jomr.2018.9202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Test the hypothesis of no difference in prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible with short implants (≤ 8 mm) compared with the sandwich osteotomy and delayed placement of standard lengths implants (> 8 mm).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane library search in combination with a hand-search was conducted by including studies published in English. No year of publication restriction was applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six randomized controlled trials characterized by low or moderate risk of bias fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in the survival rate of suprastructures and implants between the two treatment modalities after one year. Sandwich osteotomy and delayed implant placement demonstrated statistically significant higher long-term peri-implant marginal bone loss as well as biological and technical complications compared with short implants (P < 0.0001). Moreover, patients significantly favoured prosthetic rehabilitation with short implants (P < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Short implants and the sandwich osteotomy with delayed placement of standard length implants appear to result in predictable outcomes in terms of high survival rate of suprastructures and implants after prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible. However, further long-term randomized controlled trials assessing donor site morbidity, an economic perspective, professional and patient-related outcome measures with the two treatment modalities are needed before definite conclusions can be provided about the beneficial use of short implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible compared with the sandwich osteotomy and delayed placement of standard length implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":230885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research","volume":"9 2","pages":"e2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5037/jomr.2018.9202","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2018.9202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Objectives: Test the hypothesis of no difference in prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible with short implants (≤ 8 mm) compared with the sandwich osteotomy and delayed placement of standard lengths implants (> 8 mm).

Material and methods: A MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane library search in combination with a hand-search was conducted by including studies published in English. No year of publication restriction was applied.

Results: Six randomized controlled trials characterized by low or moderate risk of bias fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in the survival rate of suprastructures and implants between the two treatment modalities after one year. Sandwich osteotomy and delayed implant placement demonstrated statistically significant higher long-term peri-implant marginal bone loss as well as biological and technical complications compared with short implants (P < 0.0001). Moreover, patients significantly favoured prosthetic rehabilitation with short implants (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Short implants and the sandwich osteotomy with delayed placement of standard length implants appear to result in predictable outcomes in terms of high survival rate of suprastructures and implants after prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible. However, further long-term randomized controlled trials assessing donor site morbidity, an economic perspective, professional and patient-related outcome measures with the two treatment modalities are needed before definite conclusions can be provided about the beneficial use of short implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of the partially edentulous atrophic posterior mandible compared with the sandwich osteotomy and delayed placement of standard length implants.

Abstract Image

短种植体(≤8mm)与夹心截骨延迟放置标准长度种植体(> 8mm)修复部分无牙萎缩后下颌骨的系统评价
目的:验证短种植体(≤8mm)与夹心截骨延迟放置标准长度种植体(> 8mm)对部分无牙萎缩后下颌骨修复效果无差异的假设。材料和方法:MEDLINE (PubMed)、Embase和Cochrane图书馆检索结合手工检索,纳入以英文发表的研究。没有适用出版年份限制。结果:6项低或中等偏倚风险的随机对照试验符合纳入标准。两种治疗方式1年后上结构和种植体的存活率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。三明治截骨术和延迟种植体放置与短种植体相比,具有统计学意义上更高的长期种植体周围边缘骨丢失以及生物和技术并发症(P < 0.0001)。此外,患者明显倾向于使用短种植体进行假肢康复(P < 0.0001)。结论:短种植体和三明治截骨术延迟放置标准长度种植体,在部分无牙萎缩后下颌骨修复后的上结构和种植体存活率方面具有可预测的结果。然而,需要进一步的长期随机对照试验来评估供体部位的发病率,从经济角度,专业和患者相关的结果测量两种治疗方式,才能得出明确的结论,与三明治截骨和延迟放置标准长度种植体相比,使用短种植体对部分无牙萎缩后下颌的修复康复有益。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信