非磨牙位置倾斜螺钉通道保留与骨水泥保留种植冠:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Momen A Atieh, Maanas Shah, Abeer Hakam, Asma Albalushi, Anas Abdulmunim, Fawaghi AlAli, Nabeel H M Alsabeeha
{"title":"非磨牙位置倾斜螺钉通道保留与骨水泥保留种植冠:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Momen A Atieh, Maanas Shah, Abeer Hakam, Asma Albalushi, Anas Abdulmunim, Fawaghi AlAli, Nabeel H M Alsabeeha","doi":"10.1111/jerd.13463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes of angled screw channel (ASC) retained implant crowns to cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized and nonrandomized trials comparing ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in single nonmolar locations were found by searching electronic databases (COCHRANE, EMBASE, and MEDLINE) up to January 2025. Changes in marginal bone level were the primary outcomes, whereas periodontal parameters, aesthetic outcomes, and technical complications were the secondary outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 973 studies were identified, of which four studies with 167 single nonmolar implant crowns were included. Overall meta-analysis showed that the difference in marginal bone level was in favor of the ASC group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD -0.03; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.06; p = 0.57). The ASC group had more positive changes in pink aesthetic score than the cemented group; however, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (MD -0.18; 95% CI -0.88 to 0.51; p = 0.61).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ASC-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites have comparable short-term clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes to cement-retained implant crowns, with less bleeding on probing expected with ASC-retained crowns.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>The superiority of ASC-retained implant crowns over cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolars was not proven. There were no significant differences between ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in terms of mean changes in marginal bone levels, probing pocket depths, aesthetic outcomes, technical complications, and implant failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":15988,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Angled Screw Channel-Retained vs. Cement-Retained Implant Crowns in Nonmolar Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Momen A Atieh, Maanas Shah, Abeer Hakam, Asma Albalushi, Anas Abdulmunim, Fawaghi AlAli, Nabeel H M Alsabeeha\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jerd.13463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes of angled screw channel (ASC) retained implant crowns to cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized and nonrandomized trials comparing ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in single nonmolar locations were found by searching electronic databases (COCHRANE, EMBASE, and MEDLINE) up to January 2025. Changes in marginal bone level were the primary outcomes, whereas periodontal parameters, aesthetic outcomes, and technical complications were the secondary outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 973 studies were identified, of which four studies with 167 single nonmolar implant crowns were included. Overall meta-analysis showed that the difference in marginal bone level was in favor of the ASC group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD -0.03; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.06; p = 0.57). The ASC group had more positive changes in pink aesthetic score than the cemented group; however, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (MD -0.18; 95% CI -0.88 to 0.51; p = 0.61).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ASC-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites have comparable short-term clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes to cement-retained implant crowns, with less bleeding on probing expected with ASC-retained crowns.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>The superiority of ASC-retained implant crowns over cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolars was not proven. There were no significant differences between ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in terms of mean changes in marginal bone levels, probing pocket depths, aesthetic outcomes, technical complications, and implant failure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15988,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13463\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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 Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13463","RegionNum":3,"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

目的:评价非磨牙位置的斜螺钉通道(ASC)保留种植冠与骨水泥保留种植冠的临床、影像学和美学效果。方法:通过检索截至2025年1月的电子数据库(COCHRANE、EMBASE和MEDLINE),找到比较asc保留和水泥保留种植冠在单个非磨牙位置的随机和非随机试验。边缘骨水平的改变是主要结果,而牙周参数、美学结果和技术并发症是次要结果。随机效应荟萃分析用于计算合并效应大小。结果:共纳入973项研究,其中4项研究纳入167个单颗非磨牙种植冠。整体meta分析显示,边缘骨水平的差异有利于ASC组,但差异无统计学意义(MD -0.03;95% CI -0.12 ~ 0.06;p = 0.57)。与骨水泥组相比,ASC组在粉红色美学评分上有更积极的变化;但两组间差异无统计学意义(MD -0.18;95% CI -0.88 ~ 0.51;p = 0.61)。结论:非磨牙位置的asc保留种植冠与水泥保留种植冠具有相当的短期临床、放射学和美学效果,asc保留种植冠在探查时出血较少。临床意义:在非磨牙中,asc保留的种植冠优于骨水泥保留的种植冠。在边缘骨水平、探查袋深度、美学结果、技术并发症和种植体失败的平均变化方面,asc保留和水泥保留种植体冠之间没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Angled Screw Channel-Retained vs. Cement-Retained Implant Crowns in Nonmolar Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes of angled screw channel (ASC) retained implant crowns to cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites.

Methods: Randomized and nonrandomized trials comparing ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in single nonmolar locations were found by searching electronic databases (COCHRANE, EMBASE, and MEDLINE) up to January 2025. Changes in marginal bone level were the primary outcomes, whereas periodontal parameters, aesthetic outcomes, and technical complications were the secondary outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled effect sizes.

Results: A total of 973 studies were identified, of which four studies with 167 single nonmolar implant crowns were included. Overall meta-analysis showed that the difference in marginal bone level was in favor of the ASC group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD -0.03; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.06; p = 0.57). The ASC group had more positive changes in pink aesthetic score than the cemented group; however, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (MD -0.18; 95% CI -0.88 to 0.51; p = 0.61).

Conclusions: ASC-retained implant crowns in nonmolar sites have comparable short-term clinical, radiographic, and aesthetic outcomes to cement-retained implant crowns, with less bleeding on probing expected with ASC-retained crowns.

Clinical significance: The superiority of ASC-retained implant crowns over cement-retained implant crowns in nonmolars was not proven. There were no significant differences between ASC-retained and cement-retained implant crowns in terms of mean changes in marginal bone levels, probing pocket depths, aesthetic outcomes, technical complications, and implant failure.

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 Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
124
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) is the longest standing peer-reviewed journal devoted solely to advancing the knowledge and practice of esthetic dentistry. Its goal is to provide the very latest evidence-based information in the realm of contemporary interdisciplinary esthetic dentistry through high quality clinical papers, sound research reports and educational features. The range of topics covered in the journal includes: - Interdisciplinary esthetic concepts - Implants - Conservative adhesive restorations - Tooth Whitening - Prosthodontic materials and techniques - Dental materials - Orthodontic, periodontal and endodontic esthetics - Esthetics related research - Innovations in esthetics
×
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