聚醚醚酮 (PEEK) 混合假体在全对四肢康复中的临床效果:系统综述协议

Hanen Boukhris, H. Hajjami, Souha Ben youssef
{"title":"聚醚醚酮 (PEEK) 混合假体在全对四肢康复中的临床效果:系统综述协议","authors":"Hanen Boukhris, H. Hajjami, Souha Ben youssef","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.150799.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The “all-on-four” concept represents a significant advancement in dental implantology. particularly beneficial in cases of extensive jaw bone loss where invasive bone regeneration procedures are typically required. However, the successful implementation of this technique necessitates meticulous planning concerning implant selection, materials, and prosthesis design. The recent introduction of PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) in dentistry, especially in all-on-four prosthetics, prompts questions regarding its clinical efficacy and comparative biomechanical and biological advantages over conventional materials such as titanium and zirconia. While some studies have compared PEEK with other materials, systematic reviews evaluating its efficacy are scarce. This systematic review protocol intends to assess the evidence regarding the viability of PEEK as a potential alternative within the all-on-four approach in dental implantology. Methods This systematic review protocol will adhere to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions and align with the Methodological Expectations of the Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidelines. Utilizing a comprehensive search strategy, multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and registries of clinical trials, will be explored. The search aims to identify randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies investigating the application of PEEK in the all-on-four approach for dental procedures. Emphasizing clinically relevant outcomes such as implant survival, prosthesis success, peri-implant complications, and patient satisfaction, this review aims to provide insights into the effectiveness and potential benefits of using PEEK in all-on-four prosthetics. Non-randomized studies will be assessed for bias using ROBINS-I, while randomized controlled trials will undergo evaluation with the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, ROB II. Discussion The outcomes derived from this systematic review hold great significance for dental practitioners exploring the all-on-four concept. Understanding PEEK’s advantages and limitations compared to titanium and zirconia facilitates tailored treatment plans, enhancing success and satisfaction, ultimately improving dental care quality. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42024531175 (Registered on 13/04/2024).","PeriodicalId":504605,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Outcomes of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Hybrid Prosthesis in All-on-Four Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review Protocol\",\"authors\":\"Hanen Boukhris, H. Hajjami, Souha Ben youssef\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/f1000research.150799.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background The “all-on-four” concept represents a significant advancement in dental implantology. particularly beneficial in cases of extensive jaw bone loss where invasive bone regeneration procedures are typically required. However, the successful implementation of this technique necessitates meticulous planning concerning implant selection, materials, and prosthesis design. The recent introduction of PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) in dentistry, especially in all-on-four prosthetics, prompts questions regarding its clinical efficacy and comparative biomechanical and biological advantages over conventional materials such as titanium and zirconia. While some studies have compared PEEK with other materials, systematic reviews evaluating its efficacy are scarce. This systematic review protocol intends to assess the evidence regarding the viability of PEEK as a potential alternative within the all-on-four approach in dental implantology. Methods This systematic review protocol will adhere to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions and align with the Methodological Expectations of the Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidelines. Utilizing a comprehensive search strategy, multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and registries of clinical trials, will be explored. The search aims to identify randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies investigating the application of PEEK in the all-on-four approach for dental procedures. Emphasizing clinically relevant outcomes such as implant survival, prosthesis success, peri-implant complications, and patient satisfaction, this review aims to provide insights into the effectiveness and potential benefits of using PEEK in all-on-four prosthetics. Non-randomized studies will be assessed for bias using ROBINS-I, while randomized controlled trials will undergo evaluation with the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, ROB II. Discussion The outcomes derived from this systematic review hold great significance for dental practitioners exploring the all-on-four concept. Understanding PEEK’s advantages and limitations compared to titanium and zirconia facilitates tailored treatment plans, enhancing success and satisfaction, ultimately improving dental care quality. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42024531175 (Registered on 13/04/2024).\",\"PeriodicalId\":504605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"F1000Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"F1000Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.150799.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.150799.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 "四对一 "概念是牙科种植学的一大进步,尤其适用于颌骨大面积缺失的病例,因为这种病例通常需要进行侵入性骨再生手术。然而,要成功实施这一技术,必须对种植体的选择、材料和修复体的设计进行周密的规划。最近,PEEK(聚醚醚酮)被引入牙科领域,尤其是用于全牙列修复,这引发了有关其临床疗效以及与钛和氧化锆等传统材料相比在生物力学和生物学方面的优势的问题。虽然有些研究将 PEEK 与其他材料进行了比较,但评估其功效的系统综述却很少。本系统综述方案旨在评估 PEEK 作为牙科种植中 "四对一 "方法的潜在替代材料的可行性。方法 本系统综述方案将遵循《科克伦干预措施系统综述手册》,并符合《科克伦干预措施综述方法学期望》(MECIR)指南。我们将采用综合检索策略,探索多个数据库,包括 PubMed、EMBASE、Scopus、EBSCO、Web of Science、Cochrane Central 和临床试验登记处。搜索的目的是确定调查在牙科手术的 "全对四 "方法中应用 PEEK 的随机对照试验和非随机研究。本综述强调与临床相关的结果,如种植体存活率、修复成功率、种植体周围并发症和患者满意度,旨在深入探讨在全对四修复中使用 PEEK 的有效性和潜在益处。非随机研究将使用 ROBINS-I 进行偏倚评估,而随机对照试验将使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险评估工具 ROB II 进行评估。讨论 本系统综述得出的结果对牙科医生探索 "四位一体 "概念具有重要意义。了解 PEEK 与钛和氧化锆相比的优势和局限性有助于制定量身定制的治疗方案,提高成功率和满意度,最终提高牙科护理质量。系统综述注册 PROSPERO:CRD42024531175(注册日期:2024 年 4 月 13 日)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Outcomes of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Hybrid Prosthesis in All-on-Four Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review Protocol
Background The “all-on-four” concept represents a significant advancement in dental implantology. particularly beneficial in cases of extensive jaw bone loss where invasive bone regeneration procedures are typically required. However, the successful implementation of this technique necessitates meticulous planning concerning implant selection, materials, and prosthesis design. The recent introduction of PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) in dentistry, especially in all-on-four prosthetics, prompts questions regarding its clinical efficacy and comparative biomechanical and biological advantages over conventional materials such as titanium and zirconia. While some studies have compared PEEK with other materials, systematic reviews evaluating its efficacy are scarce. This systematic review protocol intends to assess the evidence regarding the viability of PEEK as a potential alternative within the all-on-four approach in dental implantology. Methods This systematic review protocol will adhere to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions and align with the Methodological Expectations of the Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidelines. Utilizing a comprehensive search strategy, multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and registries of clinical trials, will be explored. The search aims to identify randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies investigating the application of PEEK in the all-on-four approach for dental procedures. Emphasizing clinically relevant outcomes such as implant survival, prosthesis success, peri-implant complications, and patient satisfaction, this review aims to provide insights into the effectiveness and potential benefits of using PEEK in all-on-four prosthetics. Non-randomized studies will be assessed for bias using ROBINS-I, while randomized controlled trials will undergo evaluation with the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, ROB II. Discussion The outcomes derived from this systematic review hold great significance for dental practitioners exploring the all-on-four concept. Understanding PEEK’s advantages and limitations compared to titanium and zirconia facilitates tailored treatment plans, enhancing success and satisfaction, ultimately improving dental care quality. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42024531175 (Registered on 13/04/2024).
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
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