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}
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.