钛和氧化锆种植体的组织学骨整合水平比较:临床前研究的荟萃分析。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Maria João da Silva Remísio, Tiago Borges, Filipe Castro, Sergio Alexandre Gehrke, Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes
{"title":"钛和氧化锆种植体的组织学骨整合水平比较:临床前研究的荟萃分析。","authors":"Maria João da Silva Remísio,&nbsp;Tiago Borges,&nbsp;Filipe Castro,&nbsp;Sergio Alexandre Gehrke,&nbsp;Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes,&nbsp;Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To assess the literature comparing histologic levels of osseointegration for titanium vs zirconia dental implants. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021236781). Electronic and manual searches were carried out through the PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Embase databases with a platform-specific search strategy combining controlled terms (MeSH and Emtree) and text words. The articles were selected by two independent investigators who evaluated the articles based on the criteria for eligibility. <b>Results:</b> A total of 17 articles were included. All were preclinical studies. The populations included dogs (27.55%), minipigs (14.28%), rats (14.28%), and rabbits (43.89%); and the implantation site varied among the mandible (36.82%), maxilla (9.04%), tibia (17.64%), skull (10.70%), and femur (25.80%). A total of 370 titanium (Ti) implants and 537 zirconia (Zr) implants were evaluated. The average osseointegration (% bone-to-implant contact) for Zr was 55.51% (17.6% to 89.09%), and for Ti was 58.50% (23.2% to 87.85%). There was no statistical difference between studies at the 2-month follow-up (<i>P</i> = .672), but this difference was significant at 1 and 3 months (<i>P</i> < .001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Within the limitations of this review, Zr implants had a similar level of osseointegration compared to Ti implants. Nonetheless, because these findings are based on preclinical research, all data must be carefully examined.</p>","PeriodicalId":50298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","volume":"38 4","pages":"667-680"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Histologic Osseointegration Level Comparing Titanium and Zirconia Dental Implants: Meta-analysis of Preclinical Studies.\",\"authors\":\"Maria João da Silva Remísio,&nbsp;Tiago Borges,&nbsp;Filipe Castro,&nbsp;Sergio Alexandre Gehrke,&nbsp;Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes,&nbsp;Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/jomi.10142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To assess the literature comparing histologic levels of osseointegration for titanium vs zirconia dental implants. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021236781). Electronic and manual searches were carried out through the PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Embase databases with a platform-specific search strategy combining controlled terms (MeSH and Emtree) and text words. The articles were selected by two independent investigators who evaluated the articles based on the criteria for eligibility. <b>Results:</b> A total of 17 articles were included. All were preclinical studies. The populations included dogs (27.55%), minipigs (14.28%), rats (14.28%), and rabbits (43.89%); and the implantation site varied among the mandible (36.82%), maxilla (9.04%), tibia (17.64%), skull (10.70%), and femur (25.80%). A total of 370 titanium (Ti) implants and 537 zirconia (Zr) implants were evaluated. The average osseointegration (% bone-to-implant contact) for Zr was 55.51% (17.6% to 89.09%), and for Ti was 58.50% (23.2% to 87.85%). There was no statistical difference between studies at the 2-month follow-up (<i>P</i> = .672), but this difference was significant at 1 and 3 months (<i>P</i> < .001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Within the limitations of this review, Zr implants had a similar level of osseointegration compared to Ti implants. Nonetheless, because these findings are based on preclinical research, all data must be carefully examined.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants\",\"volume\":\"38 4\",\"pages\":\"667-680\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10142\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","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

摘要

目的:评估比较钛和氧化锆种植体骨整合组织学水平的文献。材料和方法:本系统审查遵循PRISMA指南进行,并在PROSPERO注册(CRD42021236781)。通过PubMed/MEDLINE、PubMed Central和Embase数据库进行电子和手动搜索,采用特定平台的搜索策略,结合受控术语(MeSH和Emtree)和文本单词。这些文章是由两名独立研究人员挑选的,他们根据资格标准对文章进行了评估。结果:共收录文章17篇。所有这些都是临床前研究。种群包括狗(27.55%)、小型猪(14.28%)、大鼠(14.28%)和兔子(43.89%);植入部位因下颌骨(36.82%)、上颌骨(9.04%)、胫骨(17.64%)、颅骨(10.70%)和股骨(25.80%)而异。共评估了370个钛(Ti)植入物和537个氧化锆(Zr)植入物。Zr和Ti的平均骨整合率(骨与植入物接触的百分比)分别为55.51%(17.6%至89.09%)和58.50%(23.2%至87.85%)。在2个月的随访中,研究之间没有统计学差异(P=.672),但在1个月和3个月时,这一差异非常显著(P<.001)。结论:在本综述的限制范围内,与Ti植入物相比,Zr植入物具有相似的骨整合水平。尽管如此,由于这些发现是基于临床前研究,因此必须仔细检查所有数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Histologic Osseointegration Level Comparing Titanium and Zirconia Dental Implants: Meta-analysis of Preclinical Studies.

Purpose: To assess the literature comparing histologic levels of osseointegration for titanium vs zirconia dental implants. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021236781). Electronic and manual searches were carried out through the PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Embase databases with a platform-specific search strategy combining controlled terms (MeSH and Emtree) and text words. The articles were selected by two independent investigators who evaluated the articles based on the criteria for eligibility. Results: A total of 17 articles were included. All were preclinical studies. The populations included dogs (27.55%), minipigs (14.28%), rats (14.28%), and rabbits (43.89%); and the implantation site varied among the mandible (36.82%), maxilla (9.04%), tibia (17.64%), skull (10.70%), and femur (25.80%). A total of 370 titanium (Ti) implants and 537 zirconia (Zr) implants were evaluated. The average osseointegration (% bone-to-implant contact) for Zr was 55.51% (17.6% to 89.09%), and for Ti was 58.50% (23.2% to 87.85%). There was no statistical difference between studies at the 2-month follow-up (P = .672), but this difference was significant at 1 and 3 months (P < .001). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this review, Zr implants had a similar level of osseointegration compared to Ti implants. Nonetheless, because these findings are based on preclinical research, all data must be carefully examined.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Edited by Steven E. Eckert, DDS, MS ISSN (Print): 0882-2786 ISSN (Online): 1942-4434 This highly regarded, often-cited journal integrates clinical and scientific data to improve methods and results of oral and maxillofacial implant therapy. It presents pioneering research, technology, clinical applications, reviews of the literature, seminal studies, emerging technology, position papers, and consensus studies, as well as the many clinical and therapeutic innovations that ensue as a result of these efforts. The editorial board is composed of recognized opinion leaders in their respective areas of expertise and reflects the international reach of the journal. Under their leadership, JOMI maintains its strong scientific integrity while expanding its influence within the field of implant dentistry. JOMI’s popular regular feature "Thematic Abstract Review" presents a review of abstracts of recently published articles on a specific topical area of interest each issue.
×
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