Survival of tooth-implant connections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Sukrit Taneja, Arun Khalikar, Sattyam Wankhade, Suryakant Deogade, Pooja Uchale, Samiksha Lalsare
{"title":"Survival of tooth-implant connections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Sukrit Taneja, Arun Khalikar, Sattyam Wankhade, Suryakant Deogade, Pooja Uchale, Samiksha Lalsare","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_161_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Implant-supported prostheses have considerable biomechanical advantages in partially edentulous patients when compared to other prosthetic options. Given the steady drop in the frequency of patients reporting with complete edentulism, it is not unusual to see situations where teeth and implants can be splinted to provide support for fixed prostheses. A tooth implant prosthesis differs majorly from an implant-supported prosthesis in terms of force dissipation and design. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the survival rates of tooth-implant-supported prostheses with fully implant-supported and fully tooth-supported prostheses. Using the appropriate search terms, PubMed, Google Scholar, and other indexed journals were used to search the English-language literature. According to the review protocols and the PICOS inclusion criteria, the pertinent studies were chosen. The screening of appropriate studies, evaluation of study quality, and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers. The pooling of survival data by prostheses failure, implant failure, and marginal bone loss was used in the meta-analysis. The cumulative data of all included studies indicated that tooth-implant-supported prostheses showed a 5-year survival rate of 77%-84% and a 10-year survival rate of 72%. The pooled risk ratio for prostheses failure and implant failure was 0.99 and 1.76, respectively. These results were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The pooled standard mean difference for marginal bone loss was 0.59, and the results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). A tooth-implant-supported fixed partial denture (FPD) has a similar survival rate when compared to implant-supported FPD or T-FPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"23 4","pages":"310-321"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10705009/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_161_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Implant-supported prostheses have considerable biomechanical advantages in partially edentulous patients when compared to other prosthetic options. Given the steady drop in the frequency of patients reporting with complete edentulism, it is not unusual to see situations where teeth and implants can be splinted to provide support for fixed prostheses. A tooth implant prosthesis differs majorly from an implant-supported prosthesis in terms of force dissipation and design. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the survival rates of tooth-implant-supported prostheses with fully implant-supported and fully tooth-supported prostheses. Using the appropriate search terms, PubMed, Google Scholar, and other indexed journals were used to search the English-language literature. According to the review protocols and the PICOS inclusion criteria, the pertinent studies were chosen. The screening of appropriate studies, evaluation of study quality, and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers. The pooling of survival data by prostheses failure, implant failure, and marginal bone loss was used in the meta-analysis. The cumulative data of all included studies indicated that tooth-implant-supported prostheses showed a 5-year survival rate of 77%-84% and a 10-year survival rate of 72%. The pooled risk ratio for prostheses failure and implant failure was 0.99 and 1.76, respectively. These results were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The pooled standard mean difference for marginal bone loss was 0.59, and the results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). A tooth-implant-supported fixed partial denture (FPD) has a similar survival rate when compared to implant-supported FPD or T-FPD.

种植牙连接的存活率:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
与其他假体选择相比,种植体支持的假体在部分缺牙患者中具有相当大的生物力学优势。考虑到报告患有完全缺牙症的患者频率稳步下降,可以用夹板固定牙齿和植入物为固定假肢提供支持的情况并不罕见。种植体义齿在力耗散和设计方面与种植体支撑的义齿有很大不同。本系统综述的目的是比较种植体支持的义齿与完全种植体支持和完全牙齿支持的义齿的存活率。使用适当的搜索词,PubMed、Google Scholar和其他索引期刊被用于搜索英语文献。根据审查方案和PICOS纳入标准,选择相关研究。适当研究的筛选、研究质量评估和数据提取由两名评审员独立进行。荟萃分析中使用了假体失败、植入物失败和边缘骨丢失的生存数据汇总。所有纳入研究的累积数据表明,种植体支持的假牙的5年生存率为77%-84%,10年生存率达72%。假体失效和植入物失效的合并风险比分别为0.99和1.76。这些结果没有统计学意义(P>0.05)。边缘骨丢失的合并标准平均差为0.59,结果具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。与种植体支持的固定部分义齿(FPD)或T-FPD相比,种植体支持固定部分义齿的存活率相似。
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
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 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