Clinical outcomes of laser microtextured implants or abutments: A systematic review.

James Carrigy, Ajay Sharma, Vittoria Perrotti, Alessandro Quaranta
{"title":"Clinical outcomes of laser microtextured implants or abutments: A systematic review.","authors":"James Carrigy,&nbsp;Ajay Sharma,&nbsp;Vittoria Perrotti,&nbsp;Alessandro Quaranta","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the effect of laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments on clinical measures that may relate to improved implant success and survival.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This review was registered on the PROSPERO database and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Embase were screened for studies with at least 10 participants and followed up for at least 1 year, reporting on the following clinical outcomes: radiographic marginal bone level, peri-implant probing depth, soft tissue index and failure rates of implants with laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After removal of duplicates, 86 articles were identified. A total of 25 articles were included after screening. Four were randomised controlled trials, two were non-randomised controlled trials, two were prospective studies, five were retrospective cohort studies and twelve had no control group. Most comparative studies reported that laser microtextured collar implants had less marginal bone loss and shallower peri-implant probing depth than machined collar implants. Only two studies had controls other than machined collar implants; in these, the use of laser microtextured collar implants was not observed to be significantly different. Three studies reported reduced marginal recession in laser microtextured collar implants when compared to machined collar controls. No difference in failure rate was observed between laser microtextured collar and machined collar implants. One study reported on peri-implant diseases and favoured laser microtextured collar implants. Three papers reported using laser microtextured abutments with no control, but no specific conclusions could be drawn.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Laser microtextured collar implants appear to reduce marginal bone loss and peri-implant probing depth when compared to machined collar implants. There is weak evidence to suggest that laser microtextured collar implants may also improve aesthetic outcomes and reduce incidence of disease. Research is required regarding laser microtextured abutments, and studies comparing laser microtexturing with alternative solutions are also lacking.</p>","PeriodicalId":73463,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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 investigate the effect of laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments on clinical measures that may relate to improved implant success and survival.

Materials and methods: This review was registered on the PROSPERO database and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Embase were screened for studies with at least 10 participants and followed up for at least 1 year, reporting on the following clinical outcomes: radiographic marginal bone level, peri-implant probing depth, soft tissue index and failure rates of implants with laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results: After removal of duplicates, 86 articles were identified. A total of 25 articles were included after screening. Four were randomised controlled trials, two were non-randomised controlled trials, two were prospective studies, five were retrospective cohort studies and twelve had no control group. Most comparative studies reported that laser microtextured collar implants had less marginal bone loss and shallower peri-implant probing depth than machined collar implants. Only two studies had controls other than machined collar implants; in these, the use of laser microtextured collar implants was not observed to be significantly different. Three studies reported reduced marginal recession in laser microtextured collar implants when compared to machined collar controls. No difference in failure rate was observed between laser microtextured collar and machined collar implants. One study reported on peri-implant diseases and favoured laser microtextured collar implants. Three papers reported using laser microtextured abutments with no control, but no specific conclusions could be drawn.

Conclusions: Laser microtextured collar implants appear to reduce marginal bone loss and peri-implant probing depth when compared to machined collar implants. There is weak evidence to suggest that laser microtextured collar implants may also improve aesthetic outcomes and reduce incidence of disease. Research is required regarding laser microtextured abutments, and studies comparing laser microtexturing with alternative solutions are also lacking.

激光微织构种植体或基台的临床效果:系统回顾。
目的:探讨激光微织体项圈或激光微织体基台对提高种植体成功率和存活率的临床措施的影响。材料和方法:本综述在PROSPERO数据库中注册,并根据系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目进行。MEDLINE(通过PubMed)和Embase筛选了至少10名参与者的研究,并随访了至少1年,报告了以下临床结果:激光微纹理领或激光微纹理基台种植体的放射学边缘骨水平、种植体周围探测深度、软组织指数和失败率。使用Cochrane风险偏倚工具或Newcastle-Ottawa量表评估研究的质量。结果:去除重复后,鉴定出86篇。筛选后共纳入25篇文章。4项为随机对照试验,2项为非随机对照试验,2项为前瞻性研究,5项为回顾性队列研究,12项无对照组。大多数比较研究报道,激光微纹理领种植体比机械领种植体具有更少的边缘骨丢失和更浅的种植体周围探测深度。只有两项研究采用机械项圈植入物以外的对照;在这些研究中,使用激光微纹理领植入物并没有观察到明显的不同。三个研究报告了激光微纹理项圈植入物与机械项圈对照相比减少了边缘衰退。激光微织构领与机械加工领的失败率无显著差异。一项研究报道了种植体周围疾病和青睐的激光微纹理衣领植入物。三篇论文报道了激光微织构基台的无控制,但没有得出具体的结论。结论:与机械领种植体相比,激光微纹理领种植体可以减少边缘骨丢失和种植体周围探测深度。有微弱的证据表明,激光微纹理项圈植入物也可以改善美观效果并减少发病率。关于激光微织构基台的研究还需要进一步深入,但目前还缺乏将激光微织构与其他解决方案进行比较的研究。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信