scholarly journals The clinical performance of all-ceramic implant-supported single crowns: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 196-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Rabel ◽  
Benedikt Christopher Spies ◽  
Stefano Pieralli ◽  
Kirstin Vach ◽  
Ralf-Joachim Kohal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
All Ceramic ◽  
Single Crowns ◽  
Ceramic Implant

scholarly journals A systematic review and meta‐analysis evaluating the survival, the failure, and the complication rates of veneered and monolithic all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (S21) ◽  
pp. 254-288
Author(s):  
Bjarni Elvar Pjetursson ◽  
Irena Sailer ◽  
Andrey Latyshev ◽  
Kerstin Rabel ◽  
Ralf‐Joachim Kohal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
All Ceramic ◽  
Single Crowns ◽  
Ceramic Implant

scholarly journals Clinical outcomes of partial and full-arch all-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses. A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 224-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Pieralli ◽  
Ralf-Joachim Kohal ◽  
Kerstin Rabel ◽  
Manja von Stein-Lausnitz ◽  
Kirstin Vach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dental Prostheses ◽  
All Ceramic ◽  
Fixed Dental Prostheses ◽  
Ceramic Implant

scholarly journals Diagnosis of SARS-Cov-2 Infection by RT-PCR Using Specimens Other Than Naso- and Oropharyngeal Swabs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 363
Author(s):  
Vânia M. Moreira ◽  
Paulo Mascarenhas ◽  
Vanessa Machado ◽  
João Botelho ◽  
José João Mendes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Oropharyngeal Swab ◽  
Nucleic Acid Assays

The rapid and accurate testing of SARS-CoV-2 infection is still crucial to mitigate, and eventually halt, the spread of this disease. Currently, nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and oropharyngeal swab (OPS) are the recommended standard sampling techniques, yet, these have some limitations such as the complexity of collection. Hence, several other types of specimens that are easier to obtain are being tested as alternatives to nasal/throat swabs in nucleic acid assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This study aims to critically appraise and compare the clinical performance of RT-PCR tests using oral saliva, deep-throat saliva/posterior oropharyngeal saliva (DTS/POS), sputum, urine, feces, and tears/conjunctival swab (CS) against standard specimens (NPS, OPS, or a combination of both). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov and NIPH Clinical Trial) were searched up to the 30th of December, 2020. Case-control and cohort studies on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS 2). We identified 1560 entries, 33 of which (1.1%) met all required criteria and were included for the quantitative data analysis. Saliva presented the higher accuracy, 92.1% (95% CI: 70.0–98.3), with an estimated sensitivity of 83.9% (95% CI: 77.4–88.8) and specificity of 96.4% (95% CI: 89.5–98.8). DTS/POS samples had an overall accuracy of 79.7% (95% CI: 43.3–95.3), with an estimated sensitivity of 90.1% (95% CI: 83.3–96.9) and specificity of 63.1% (95% CI: 36.8–89.3). The remaining index specimens could not be adequately assessed given the lack of studies available. Our meta-analysis shows that saliva samples from the oral region provide a high sensitivity and specificity; therefore, these appear to be the best candidates for alternative specimens to NPS/OPS in SARS-CoV-2 detection, with suitable protocols for swab-free sample collection to be determined and validated in the future. The distinction between oral and extra-oral salivary samples will be crucial, since DTS/POS samples may induce a higher rate of false positives. Urine, feces, tears/CS and sputum seem unreliable for diagnosis. Saliva testing may increase testing capacity, ultimately promoting the implementation of truly deployable COVID-19 tests, which could either work at the point-of-care (e.g. hospitals, clinics) or at outbreak control spots (e.g., schools, airports, and nursing homes).

scholarly journals Long-term Short Implants Performance: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Essential Assessment Parameters

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thais Marques Simek Vega Gonçalves ◽  
Sergio Bortolini ◽  
Matteo Martinolli ◽  
Bruna Fernandes Moreira Alfenas ◽  
Daiane Cristina Peruzzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Implant Failure ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Survival Rate ◽  
Short Implants

<p>Lack of standard criteria in the outcome assessment makes it difficult to draw conclusions on the clinical performance of short implants and, under these circumstances, determine the reasons for implant failure. This study evaluated, through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis, the essential parameters required to assess the long-term clinical performance of short and extra-short implants. Electronic databases (Pubmed-MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Database, Embase, and Lilacs) were searched by two independent reviewers, without language limitation, to identify eligible papers. References from the selected articles were also reviewed. The review included clinical trials involving short dental implants placed in humans, published between January 2000 and March 2014, which described the parameters applied for outcome's measurements and provided data on survival rates. Thirteen methodologically acceptable studies were selected and 24 parameters were identified. The most frequent parameters assessed were the marginal bone loss and the cumulative implant survival rate, followed by implant failure rate and biological complications such as bleeding on probing and probing pocket depths. Only cumulative implant survival rate data allows meta-analysis revealing a positive effect size (from 0.052 (fixed) to 0.042 (random)), which means that short implant appears to be a successful treatment option. Mechanical complications and crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio measurement were also commonly described, however, considering the available evidence; no strong conclusions could be drawn since different methods were used to assess each parameter. By means of this literature review, a standard evaluation scheme is proposed, being helpful to regiment further investigations and comparisons on future studies.</p>

scholarly journals Clinical performance of monolithic CAD/CAM tooth-supported zirconia restorations: systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celina Inês Miranda Brito Leitão ◽  
Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes ◽  
Luís Pedro Pereira Azevedo ◽  
Filipe Miguel Araújo ◽  
Helena Donato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cad Cam

Clinical performance and chemical-physical properties of bulk fill composites resin —a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. e249-e264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leticia Cristina Cidreira Boaro ◽  
Diana Pereira Lopes ◽  
Andréia Santos Caetano de Souza ◽  
Ellea Lie Nakano ◽  
Mirko Dennys Ayala Perez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Physical Properties ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Factors Associated with Attrition and Performance Throughout Surgical Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 429-442
Author(s):  
Carla Hope ◽  
John-Joe Reilly ◽  
Gareth Griffiths ◽  
Jon Lund ◽  
David Humes
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Surgical Training ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Attrition Rate ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Surgical Residency ◽  
Institutional Data ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background Attrition within surgical training is a challenge. In the USA, attrition rates are as high as 20–26%. The factors predicting attrition are not well known. The aim of this systematic review is to identify factors that influence attrition or performance during surgical training. Method The review was performed in line with PRISMA guidelines and registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF). Medline, EMBASE, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for articles. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Pooled estimates were calculated using random effects meta-analyses in STATA version 15 (Stata Corp Ltd). A sensitivity analysis was performed including only multi-institutional studies. Results The searches identified 3486 articles, of which 31 were included, comprising 17,407 residents. Fifteen studies were based on multi-institutional data and 16 on single-institutional data. Twenty-nine of the studies are based on US residents. The pooled estimate for overall attrition was 17% (95% CI 14–20%). Women had a significantly higher pooled attrition than men (24% vs 16%, p < 0.001). Some studies reported Hispanic residents had a higher attrition rate than non-Hispanic residents. There was no increased risk of attrition with age, marital or parental status. Factors reported to affect performance were non-white ethnicity and faculty assessment of clinical performance. Childrearing was not associated with performance. Conclusion Female gender is associated with higher attrition in general surgical residency. Longitudinal studies of contemporary surgical cohorts are needed to investigate the complex multi-factorial reasons for failing to complete surgical residency.

The influence of crown-to-implant ratio in single crowns on clinical outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Piza Pellizzer ◽  
Jéssica Marcela de Luna Gomes ◽  
Cleidiel Aparecido Araújo Lemos ◽  
Lurian Minatel ◽  
João Pedro Justino de Oliveira Limírio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Crowns
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document