经窦种植体全弓康复的适应症、技术和并发症:系统回顾和流行meta分析。

Francesco Gianfreda, Donato Antonacci, Filiberto Mastrangelo, Carlo Raffone, Leonardo Mancini, Maria Scarpati Cioffari di Castiglione, Vito Carlo Alberto Caponio, Patrizio Bollero
{"title":"经窦种植体全弓康复的适应症、技术和并发症:系统回顾和流行meta分析。","authors":"Francesco Gianfreda, Donato Antonacci, Filiberto Mastrangelo, Carlo Raffone, Leonardo Mancini, Maria Scarpati Cioffari di Castiglione, Vito Carlo Alberto Caponio, Patrizio Bollero","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the failure rate of trans-sinus implants for full-arch rehabilitation in atrophic maxillae, comparing their outcomes to those achieved with axial and tilted implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including studies where patients underwent rehabilitation with trans-sinus implants alone or in combination with axial or zygomatic implants. The review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42024537320). A meta-analysis using Haldane and hybrid corrections compared failure rates between implant types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 2,359 articles, 10 studies employing trans-sinus implants were selected. In the meta-analysis, the trans-sinus group was composed of 232 implants, 5 of which failed, compared to 5 of the 675 implants in the axial/tilted group. There were no statistically significant differences in failure rate between the groups (RRHaldane = 2.80, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 8.77, P = 0.076; RRHybrid = 2.74, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 8.17, P = 0.070). The pooled analysis indicated a comparable success rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trans-sinus implants represent a viable alternative, in terms of survival rate, to axial/tilted implants for rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla, minimising the need for invasive procedures such as extensive bone grafting; however, further controlled clinical trials with longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these results.</p>","PeriodicalId":73463,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","volume":"18 2","pages":"105-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indications, techniques and complications associated with full-arch rehabilitation using trans-sinus implants: A systematic review and prevalence meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Gianfreda, Donato Antonacci, Filiberto Mastrangelo, Carlo Raffone, Leonardo Mancini, Maria Scarpati Cioffari di Castiglione, Vito Carlo Alberto Caponio, Patrizio Bollero\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the failure rate of trans-sinus implants for full-arch rehabilitation in atrophic maxillae, comparing their outcomes to those achieved with axial and tilted implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including studies where patients underwent rehabilitation with trans-sinus implants alone or in combination with axial or zygomatic implants. The review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42024537320). A meta-analysis using Haldane and hybrid corrections compared failure rates between implant types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 2,359 articles, 10 studies employing trans-sinus implants were selected. In the meta-analysis, the trans-sinus group was composed of 232 implants, 5 of which failed, compared to 5 of the 675 implants in the axial/tilted group. There were no statistically significant differences in failure rate between the groups (RRHaldane = 2.80, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 8.77, P = 0.076; RRHybrid = 2.74, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 8.17, P = 0.070). The pooled analysis indicated a comparable success rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trans-sinus implants represent a viable alternative, in terms of survival rate, to axial/tilted implants for rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla, minimising the need for invasive procedures such as extensive bone grafting; however, further controlled clinical trials with longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)\",\"volume\":\"18 2\",\"pages\":\"105-116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

目的:评价经鼻窦种植体治疗萎缩性上颌全弓康复的失败率,并将其与轴向种植体和倾斜种植体的效果进行比较。材料和方法:本综述遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,包括单独经鼻窦植入物或与轴向或颧骨植入物联合进行康复的患者的研究。该综述已在国际前瞻性系统综述注册(ID: CRD42024537320)上注册。一项使用Haldane矫正和混合矫正的荟萃分析比较了不同种植体类型的失败率。结果:在2359篇文章中,选择了10篇采用经窦植入物的研究。在meta分析中,经鼻窦组有232个种植体,其中5个失败,而轴向/倾斜组有675个种植体中有5个失败。两组患者的失败率差异无统计学意义(RRHaldane = 2.80, 95%可信区间0.89 ~ 8.77,P = 0.076;RRHybrid = 2.74, 95%可信区间0.91 ~ 8.17,P = 0.070)。合并分析显示了相似的成功率。结论:就存活率而言,经鼻窦种植体是一种可行的替代轴向/倾斜种植体用于萎缩上颌的康复,最大限度地减少了大面积植骨等侵入性手术的需要;然而,需要更长的随访期的进一步对照临床试验来证实这些结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Indications, techniques and complications associated with full-arch rehabilitation using trans-sinus implants: A systematic review and prevalence meta-analysis.

Purpose: To evaluate the failure rate of trans-sinus implants for full-arch rehabilitation in atrophic maxillae, comparing their outcomes to those achieved with axial and tilted implants.

Materials and methods: The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including studies where patients underwent rehabilitation with trans-sinus implants alone or in combination with axial or zygomatic implants. The review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42024537320). A meta-analysis using Haldane and hybrid corrections compared failure rates between implant types.

Results: Out of 2,359 articles, 10 studies employing trans-sinus implants were selected. In the meta-analysis, the trans-sinus group was composed of 232 implants, 5 of which failed, compared to 5 of the 675 implants in the axial/tilted group. There were no statistically significant differences in failure rate between the groups (RRHaldane = 2.80, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 8.77, P = 0.076; RRHybrid = 2.74, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 8.17, P = 0.070). The pooled analysis indicated a comparable success rate.

Conclusions: Trans-sinus implants represent a viable alternative, in terms of survival rate, to axial/tilted implants for rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla, minimising the need for invasive procedures such as extensive bone grafting; however, further controlled clinical trials with longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these results.

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