Bisphosphonates for periprosthetic bone loss after joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials

AIM: To evaluate and compare the marginal bone loss and aesthetic outcomes of zirconia implants with titanium implants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic [PubMed] and hand searches were performed to identify randomized controlled trials that were published between January 2008 to April 2020 which investigated and compared various outcomes between zirconia and titanium dental implants. Outcomes included assessment of marginal bone loss and aesthetics using spectrophotometric measurements. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate the above parameters among various studies. RESULTS: A total of 58 articles were screened for titles and abstracts. Subsequently 8 articles were selected for data extraction and evaluation. Zirconia implants were investigated and compared to titanium implants for marginal bone loss [MBL]. Customized zirconia and titanium abutments seated over implants were analyzed for aesthetic outcomes using spectrophotometric method using CIE-Lab measurements. Meta-analysis estimated that zirconia implants exhibited marginal bone loss reduction of 0.179mm (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.33) and -0.242mm (95% CI, -4.026 to 3.542) in aesthetic measurements than titanium implants. CONCLUSIONS: No heterogeneity was observed among studies analyzed for marginal bone loss and significant differences were noticed between two groups. Noticeable heterogeneity was observed among studies assessing aesthetics using spectrophotometry and CIE-Lab measurements and results revealed no many significant differences between the two groups.

Download Full-text

Short Dental Implants (≤7mm) Versus Longer Implants in Augmented Bone Area: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The Open Dentistry Journal ◽

10.2174/1874210601812010354 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 354-365 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Priscila N. Uehara ◽

Victor Haruo Matsubara ◽

Fernando Igai ◽

Newton Sesma ◽

Marcio K. Mukai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Survival Rate ◽

Bone Loss ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Bone Area ◽

Marginal Bone Loss ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Short Implants

Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to compare the survival rate and the marginal bone loss between short implants (≤7 mm) placed in the atrophic area and longer implants placed in the augmented bone area of posterior regions of maxillaries. Methods: Electronic search using three databases was performed up to May 2017 to identify Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) assessing short implants survival with a minimal follow-up of 12 months post-loading. For the meta-analysis, a Risk Difference (RD) with the 95% Confidence Interval (CI) was used to pool the results of implant failure rate for each treatment group. For the marginal bone changes, Mean Differences (MD) with 95% CI were calculated. Results: Seven randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, being included in qualitative and quantitative analyses. The RD between the short implant group and the control group was -0.02 (95% CI: -0.04 to 0.00), I2=0 and Chi2=3.14, indicating a favorable survival rate for short implant, but with no statistical significance (p=0.09). Discussion: For marginal bone loss, the mean difference was -0,13 (95%CI: -0.22 to -0.05), favoring the test group with statistical significance (p=0.002). The studies showed more heterogeneity for bone loss compared to survival rate. Short and longer implants showed similar survival rates after one year of loading, however the marginal bone loss around short implants was lower than in longer implants sites. Conclusion: Placement of implants ≤7 mm of length was found to be a predictable alternative for the rehabilitation of atrophic posterior regions, avoiding all the disadvantages intrinsic to bone augmentation procedures.

Download Full-text