scholarly journals Sandblasting reduces dental implant failure rate but not marginal bone level loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. e0216428 ◽  
Author(s):  
László Márk Czumbel ◽  
Beáta Kerémi ◽  
Noémi Gede ◽  
Alexandra Mikó ◽  
Barbara Tóth ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Fabian Duttenhoefer ◽  
Marc Anton Fuessinger ◽  
Yasmin Beckmann ◽  
Rainer Schmelzeisen ◽  
Knut A. Groetz ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Impaired health conditions and related lack of adequate host healing are among the most important conditions that account for dental implant failure. Today clinicians face an increasing number of immunocompromised patients requesting implant-based rehabilitation. To provide clinical evidence for prospective decision-making, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the influence of immunodeficiency on dental implant survival. Methods The study was conducted according to the PRISMA Statement and the principles of the Cochrane Collaboration. MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched. Results were calculated by the pooled incidence of implant loss. Reported odds ratios (OR) from fully adjusted models were preferred. Distinct risk estimates were synthesised with 95% confidence intervals. Results A total of 62 publications including 1751 endosseous implants placed in immunocompromised patients were included. For the follow-up of 24 months and longer, the mean survival rate of implants in patients with HIV was 93.1%, chemotherapy was 98.8%, autoimmune disease was 88.75%, after organ transplantation was 100%. Crohn’s disease showed a significant effect on early implant failure and resulted in increased, however not significant, implant loss. Conclusion No significant effect of immunocompromised conditions on implant survival was detectable. Implant-based therapy in immunocompromised patients should not aggravate the general morbidity and must not interfere in life-saving therapies. A careful risk stratification prior implant therapy is fundamental. To further decipher the role of immunosuppression on dental implantology, more data from controlled and randomised studies are needed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 402-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matheus Piardi Claudy ◽  
Sergio Augusto Quevedo Miguens ◽  
Roger Keller Celeste ◽  
Raphael Camara Parente ◽  
Pedro Antonio González Hernandez ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanes Silva Santos ◽  
Thiago de Santana Santos ◽  
Paulo Ricardo Saquete Martins Filho ◽  
Nadine von Krockow ◽  
Paul Weigl ◽  
...  

Abstract The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the peri-implant vertical bone loss of immediate loading of implant crowns using the one abutment at one time (AOT) protocol and implants with abutment removal (AR). This systematic review with meta-analysis was reported according to the PRISMA statement, with guidance from the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. A total of 103 publications were identified in the PubMed database and reference lists of examined articles. After the screening of titles and abstracts, the eligibility of eight full-text articles was assessed. Five studies published between 2010 and 2015 were included in the meta-analysis. There was less peri-implant vertical bone loss at implants using an AOT protocol than at implants using AR protocol (WMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.13; p<0.0001; random-effects model). In conclusion, the use of the AOT protocol with platform-switched Morse implants results in less bone loss than do AR procedures, but this effect may not be clinically relevant. The preservation of marginal bone level achieved with the AOT protocol may not enhance the aesthetics. These results should be interpreted with caution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document