倾斜种植体对种植体支持固定局部义齿的影响：系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.11.015

Rhaslla Gonçalves Batista DDS , Daniele Sorgatto Faé DDS , Victor Augusto Alves Bento DDS, MSc , Cléber Davi Del Rey Daltro Rosa DDS, MSc , Victor Eduardo de Souza Batista DDS, MSc, PhD , Eduardo Piza Pellizzer DDS, MSc, PhD , Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo Lemos DDS, MSc, PhD

{"title":"倾斜种植体对种植体支持固定局部义齿的影响：系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Rhaslla Gonçalves Batista DDS , Daniele Sorgatto Faé DDS , Victor Augusto Alves Bento DDS, MSc , Cléber Davi Del Rey Daltro Rosa DDS, MSc , Victor Eduardo de Souza Batista DDS, MSc, PhD , Eduardo Piza Pellizzer DDS, MSc, PhD , Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo Lemos DDS, MSc, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.11.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>The use of tilted implants has been considered a suitable option for completely edentulous patients. However, consensus on their clinical performance is lacking, specifically for partial rehabilitation.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div><span>The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the </span>marginal bone loss and implant survival rate of tilted implants compared with those of axial implants for implant-supported fixed partial dentures (ISFPDs).</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and ProQuest databases and reference lists for articles published until May 2022 was performed by 2 independent reviewers without language or publication date restrictions. A meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan version 5.4 program. Quality assessments were performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Nine studies were included, totaling 258 participants and 604 implants (269 tilted implants and 335 axial implants). No significant differences were found between the tilted and axial implants for the implant survival rate (<em>P</em>=.81; risk ratio: 1.14). However, higher marginal bone loss values were observed for tilted implants (<em>P</em>=.001; mean difference: 0.12 mm). No significant heterogeneity was observed in either analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No significant relationship was found between tilted and axial implants for ISFPD rehabilitation. However, tilted implants presented greater risks of marginal bone loss than axial implants.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":"132 5","pages":"Pages 890-897"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of tilted implants for implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A systematic review with meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Rhaslla Gonçalves Batista DDS , Daniele Sorgatto Faé DDS , Victor Augusto Alves Bento DDS, MSc , Cléber Davi Del Rey Daltro Rosa DDS, MSc , Victor Eduardo de Souza Batista DDS, MSc, PhD , Eduardo Piza Pellizzer DDS, MSc, PhD , Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo Lemos DDS, MSc, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.11.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>The use of tilted implants has been considered a suitable option for completely edentulous patients. However, consensus on their clinical performance is lacking, specifically for partial rehabilitation.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div><span>The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the </span>marginal bone loss and implant survival rate of tilted implants compared with those of axial implants for implant-supported fixed partial dentures (ISFPDs).</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and ProQuest databases and reference lists for articles published until May 2022 was performed by 2 independent reviewers without language or publication date restrictions. A meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan version 5.4 program. Quality assessments were performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Nine studies were included, totaling 258 participants and 604 implants (269 tilted implants and 335 axial implants). No significant differences were found between the tilted and axial implants for the implant survival rate (<em>P</em>=.81; risk ratio: 1.14). However, higher marginal bone loss values were observed for tilted implants (<em>P</em>=.001; mean difference: 0.12 mm). No significant heterogeneity was observed in either analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No significant relationship was found between tilted and axial implants for ISFPD rehabilitation. However, tilted implants presented greater risks of marginal bone loss than axial implants.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"132 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 890-897\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391322007399\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391322007399","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

问题陈述：倾斜种植体一直被认为是完全无牙颌患者的合适选择。目的：本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估倾斜种植体与轴向种植体在种植体支持的固定局部义齿（ISFPDs）中的边缘骨损失和种植体存活率：由两名独立审稿人对MEDLINE/PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane和ProQuest数据库以及参考文献列表中截至2022年5月发表的文章进行了系统检索，没有语言或发表日期限制。使用RevMan 5.4版程序进行荟萃分析。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行质量评估：共纳入 9 项研究，258 名参与者和 604 个种植体（269 个倾斜种植体和 335 个轴向种植体）。倾斜种植体和轴向种植体在种植体存活率方面无明显差异（P=.81；风险比：1.14）。不过，倾斜种植体的边缘骨损失值更高（P=.001；平均差异：0.12 毫米）。两项分析均未观察到明显的异质性：结论：在ISFPD修复中，倾斜种植体和轴向种植体之间没有发现明显的关系。然而，倾斜种植体比轴向种植体有更大的边缘骨丧失风险。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Impact of tilted implants for implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Statement of problem

The use of tilted implants has been considered a suitable option for completely edentulous patients. However, consensus on their clinical performance is lacking, specifically for partial rehabilitation.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the marginal bone loss and implant survival rate of tilted implants compared with those of axial implants for implant-supported fixed partial dentures (ISFPDs).

Material and methods

A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and ProQuest databases and reference lists for articles published until May 2022 was performed by 2 independent reviewers without language or publication date restrictions. A meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan version 5.4 program. Quality assessments were performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale.

Results

Nine studies were included, totaling 258 participants and 604 implants (269 tilted implants and 335 axial implants). No significant differences were found between the tilted and axial implants for the implant survival rate (P=.81; risk ratio: 1.14). However, higher marginal bone loss values were observed for tilted implants (P=.001; mean difference: 0.12 mm). No significant heterogeneity was observed in either analysis.

Conclusions

No significant relationship was found between tilted and axial implants for ISFPD rehabilitation. However, tilted implants presented greater risks of marginal bone loss than axial implants.

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

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

7.00

自引率

13.00%

发文量

599

审稿时长

69 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.