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, Tiago Borges, Filipe Castro, Sergio Alexandre Gehrke, Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes, 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, Tiago Borges, Filipe Castro, Sergio Alexandre Gehrke, Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes, 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}
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.
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.