The Clinical Performance of Narrow Diameter Implants Versus Regular Diameter Implants: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 503-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meng Ma ◽  
Mengxing Qi ◽  
Dongsheng Zhang ◽  
Hongchen Liu
Keyword(s):  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Narrow Diameter Implants

The purpose of this study is to analyze 1- and 3-year clinical performances of narrow diameter implants (NDIs) versus regular diameter implants (RDIs). A search of electronic databases and a manual search was performed for the time period January 2000 to April 2018. A meta-regression was used to evaluate the effects of the “fixed effects” model on the implant survival rates, prosthesis success rates and marginal bone loss (MBL) with follow-up time of 1 year and 3 years. Of the 11 studies included, the overall combined 1-year implant survival rates were 98.14% for NDIs and 98.20% for RDIs. The overall combined 3-year implant survival rates were 98.71% for NDIs and 98.84% for RDIs. The corresponding values for 1-year prosthesis success rates were 96.94% for NDIs and 99.25% for RDIs. The corresponding values for 3-year prosthesis success rates were 89.25% for NDIs and 96.55% for RDIs. The meta-regression showed no significant differences between NDIs and RDIs regarding implant survival rates, prosthesis success rates, and MBL in 1-year and 3-year follow-up (P > .05). The results of this meta-analysis concluded that the implant diameter did not affect its survival rates, prosthesis success rates, and MBL in 1 and 3 years. The use of NDIs instead of bone augmentation procedures with RDIs did not affect its survival rates, prosthesis success rates, and MBL in the short-term and middle-term. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials and long follow-up studies are needed on this topic.

scholarly journals Long-Term Clinical Behavior and Complications of Intentionally Tilted Dental Implants Compared with Straight Implants Supporting Fixed Restorations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 509
Author(s):  
Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann ◽  
Ignacio García-Gil ◽  
Patricia Pedregal ◽  
Jesús Peláez ◽  
Juan Carlos Prados-Frutos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Clinical Behavior ◽  
Manual Search

The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical behavior of straight implants in comparison with intentionally tilted dental implants (ITDI) supporting fixed restorations in partial or total edentulous arches, analyzing implant survival and success rates, complications, and marginal bone loss (MBL) after >5 years of function. An electronic search was conducted in five electronic databases (MEDLINE/Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) supplemented by a manual search. The electronic and manual search identified 1853 articles, of which 8 articles were selected for analysis. Out of a total of 3987 dental implants, 2036 were axial dental implants and 1951 tilted. Similar results were found in implant survival or overall implant success rates. Moreover, no statistically significant differences were found in MBL (p = 0.369; MD 0.116 mm (−0.137; 0.369) 95% CI) The prosthodontic/biological complications reported in the articles were very diverse and irregularly distributed. This systematic review suggests that there is no difference between tilted compared with straight dental implants in the medium-long term (>5 years). However, further research is needed to generate long-term data and confirm the present review’s findings.

scholarly journals Simultaneous implant placement with autogenous onlay bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guoqiang Ma ◽  
Chaoan Wu ◽  
Miaoting Shao
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bone Grafts ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Delayed Implant Placement ◽  
Onlay Grafts

AbstractSeveral authors have suggested that implants can be placed simultaneously with onlay bone grafts without affecting outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to answer the following clinical questions: (1) What are the outcomes of implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay bone grafts? And (2) is there a difference in outcomes between simultaneous vs delayed placement of implants with autogenous onlay bone grafts? Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 November 2020. Data on implant survival was extracted from all the included studies (single arm and comparative) to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled using the DerSimonian–Laird meta-analysis model. We also compared implant survival rates between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with data from comparative studies. Nineteen studies were included. Five of them compared simultaneous and delayed placement of implants. Dividing the studies based on follow-up duration, the pooled survival of implant placed simultaneously with onlay grafts after <2.5 years of follow-up was 93.1% (95% CI 82.6 to 97.4%) and after 2.5–5 years was 86% (95% CI 78.6 to 91.1%). Implant survival was found to be 85.8% (95% CI 79.6 to 90.3%) with iliac crest grafts and 95.7% (95% CI 83.9 to 93.0%) with intra-oral grafts. Our results indicated no statistically significant difference in implant survival between simultaneous and delayed placement (OR 0.43, 95% 0.07, 2.49, I2=59.04%). Data on implant success and bone loss were limited. Data indicates that implants placed simultaneously with autogenous onlay grafts have a survival rate of 93.1% and 86% after a follow-up of <2.5 years and 2.5–5years respectively. A limited number of studies indicate no significant difference in implant survival between the simultaneous and delayed placement of implants with onlay bone grafts. There is a need for randomized controlled trials comparing simultaneous and delayed implant placement to provide robust evidence.

scholarly journals Less Invasive Surgical Procedures Using Narrow-Diameter Implants: A Prospective Study in 20 Consecutive Patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 693-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
France Emmanuelle Lambert ◽  
Geoffrey Lecloux ◽  
Charlotte Grenade ◽  
Alice Bouhy ◽  
Marc Lamy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Remodeling ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Clinical Situation ◽  
Insertion Torque ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Narrow Diameter Implants

Narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) are increasingly produced and used in implant dentistry, especially since the introduction of new, more resistant materials. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of NDIs (3.3 mm) placed in thin alveolar crests. Twenty consecutive patients needing implant-supported fixed partial dentures and presenting an alveolar thickness ≤6 mm were treated with 1 or several NDIs. The surgical protocol was chosen according to the clinical situation: (1) flapless, (2) mini-cervical flap, (3) wide flap, (4) wide flap + guided bone regeneration (GBR). Implants were immediately loaded if the primary stability was higher than 20 Ncm. Implant survival and success, prosthodontic success rates, and patient-centered outcomes were evaluated after a follow-up period of 1 year. A total of 39 implants were placed in 20 patients, 12 and 27 implants in the anterior regions and in the posterior mandible, respectively. All but 1 implant reached an insertion torque higher than 20 Ncm and were loaded within 48 hours. The implant survival and success rates both reached 94.7%. The need for GBR was avoided in 60% of the implant sites. The mean peri-implant bone remodeling after a follow-up period of 1 year was −0.35 mm at the implant level. Peri-implant bone remodeling was higher in the posterior region, when the alveolar crest was thinner than 4 mm and GBR was required in addition. In conclusion, use of NDIs to restore partial edentation in sites with limited horizontal thickness seems to be an effective treatment option that prevented GBR in the majority of the present cases. Immediate provisionalization of NDIs does not seem to impair the results.

scholarly journals Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Implant Overdentures Delivered with Different Design and Attachment Systems: Results Between One and 17 Years of Follow-Up

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Tallarico ◽  
Luca Ortensi ◽  
Matteo Martinolli ◽  
Alessio Casucci ◽  
Emiliano Ferrari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Computer Aided Design ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Biological Parameters ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Mechanical Complications ◽  
Computer Aided

Purpose: To analyze implant and prosthetic survival rates, complications, patient satisfaction, and biological parameters of patients rehabilitated with implant overdentures (IOV) on splinted and nonsplinted implants and different attachment systems, in function for one to 17 years. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated data collected from patients rehabilitated with implant overdentures between January 2001 and December 2016 in nine different centers. Outcome measures were implant and prosthetic success rates, mechanical complications, marginal bone loss (MBL), oral health impact profile (OHIP), bleeding on probing, and plaque index. Results: A total of 581 implants were installed in 194 patients. Patients were followed for a mean period of 60.6 months (range 6–206). Eighty-nine patients received 296 low profile attachment (OT Equator), 62 patients received 124 ball attachments, and 43 patients received 107 Locator attachments. In eighty-three patients the implants were splinted with computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) or casted bar. At the last follow-up, 10 implants failed in eight patients. Statistical significance was found for failed prostheses (P = 0.0723) and complications (P = 0.0165), with better values for splinted implants. No statistically significant differences were found in proportion of implant and prosthetic failure (P > 0.05). At a five-year follow-up, proportion of complications (P = 0.0289) and failed prostheses (P = 0.0069) were statistically higher for IOV on Locator attachments. No difference was founded in MBL at one- and two-year follow-up between different attachment systems (P > 0.05). Statistically significant improvement in all the OHIP categories was reported in all the patients, after one year of function. Conclusions: Implant overdenture showed high implant and prosthetic survival rates, low complications, high patient satisfaction, and good biological parameters in the long-term follow-up. Splinting the implants may reduce number of mechanical complications. Locator attachments showed higher number of complications. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

scholarly journals Prefabricated Bar System for Immediate Loading in Edentulous Patients: A 5-Year Follow-Up Prospective Longitudinal Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico F. Gherlone ◽  
Gianpaolo Sannino ◽  
Andrea Rapanelli ◽  
Roberto Crespi ◽  
Giorgio Gastaldi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal Study ◽  
Bone Level ◽  
New Type ◽  
Edentulous Patients ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Objectives. The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate a new type of prefabricated bar system, supported by axial and tilted implants at 5-year follow-up. Materials and Methods. Twenty-nine consecutive participants (19 females, 10 males) (mean age 61.4 years), edentulous in one or both jaws, with severe atrophy of the posterior regions, were treated according to the All-on-four® protocol with immediately loaded axial (64) and tilted (64) implants supporting complete-arch screw-retained prostheses (12 maxillary, 20 mandibular) featuring a prefabricated bar as framework. Follow-up visits were performed at 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 60 months after implant insertion. Radiographic assessments were made using panoramic radiographs obtained immediately after surgery and at each follow-up visit. Bone level measurements around the axial and tilted implants were compared by means of the Student’s t-test. Results. One axial implant failed in the lower jaw and did not compromise prosthetic function. The 60-month overall implant survival rate was 100% for axially positioned implants and 98.44% for tilted implants. The implant survival rates were 100% in the maxilla and 98.75% in the mandible. None of the 32 fixed prostheses were lost during the observation period, representing a prosthetic survival rate of 100%. No statistically significant differences (P>0.05) in marginal bone loss between tilted and axial implants were detected in either jaw over time. Conclusions. The use of the evaluated prefabricated bar for immediately loaded implants placed according to the All-on-four concept may significantly reduce implant failures; however, more long-term prospective clinical trials are needed to affirm the effectiveness of the surgical-prosthetic protocol.

Abstract 266: Quantifying the Effect of Technological Advancements and Guidelines on Pediatric Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Survival Outcomes

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anish Sangari ◽  
Nitish Sood ◽  
Joseph Hauger
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Serum Lactate ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Meta Regression Analysis

Introduction: The 2009 H1N1 pandemic resulted in a substantial increase in the use of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). The concurrent release of guidelines by the French Ministry of Health also led to the standardization of ECPR protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine if the simultaneous development of guidelines and expanded usage led to an increase in survival to hospital discharge (SHD) in pediatric ECPR and to investigate if predictors of survival have changed since 2009. Methods: PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched to identify studies examining survival outcome and predictors of survival for pediatric ECPR. A random-effects model was applied. Additional pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed using a fixed-effects model. A univariate meta-regression analysis was conducted. Results: The meta-analysis included 3,454 patients from 30 studies. Total survival rates have not improved in pediatric ECPR between subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test: p > 0.05). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) duration for survivors was not significantly different than nonsurvivors before 2009 RR -0.02 [95% CI: -0.19 - 0.14], but was significantly lower than nonsurvivors after 2009 RR -0.32 [-0.48 - -0.15, p < 0.05]. Meta-regression analysis revealed the ratio of ECMO duration for survivors compared to non-survivors has significantly decreased from 1998 to 2020 (p < 0.05). Patient age was a significant predictor of survival pre-2009 RR but is not correlated with survival post-2009 (p > 0.05). PaO2 was significantly higher in survivors than nonsurvivors pre-2009 RR 0.15 [0.12 - 0.18, p < 0.05] but was not significantly different post-2009 (p > 0.05). End-tidal CO2, CPR duration, pre-CPR serum lactate, and pre-CPR creatinine were not significantly different (p > 0.05) between survivors and non-survivors in either pre-2009 or post-2009. Conclusion: Pediatric ECPR did not see major improvement in survival rates since 2009. In addition, predictors of survival for pediatric ECPR cases have changed over the last 10 years. As such, clinicians may be advised to rely much more heavily on recent research regarding predictors of survival in pediatric ECPR cases.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Ball Attachment Systems in Implant Retained- and Supported-Overdentures: A Three- to Five-Year Retrospective Examination

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Luca Ortensi ◽  
Matteo Martinolli ◽  
Carlo Borromeo ◽  
Francesco Mattia Ceruso ◽  
Marco Gargari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Technical Complications ◽  
Implant Overdenture ◽  
Biological Outcomes ◽  
Retrospective Examination

Purpose: To evaluate implant and prosthetic survival rates, complications, patient satisfaction, and biological outcomes of patients rehabilitated with a ball attachment system for implant retained- and supported-overdentures (IOV), which was in function for 3 to 5 years. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated data collected from patients treated between April 2001 and May 2018 with IOV on splinted and non-splinted implants and a ball attachment system. Patients were followed for 36 to 206 months (mean follow-up was 128.1 ± 51.9 months). Data were collected at the 3- and 5-year follow-up examination. Outcome measures were implant and prosthetic survival rates, technical complications, marginal bone loss (MBL), oral health impact profile (OHIP), and periodontal parameters (bleeding on probing and plaque index). Results: A total of 46 patients (16 males and 30 females) with 124 implants were included in this study. Twenty-five implant-retained overdentures were delivered on 53 unsplinted implants, while the other 21 patients received an implant-supported overdentures and the implants were splinted. At the five-year follow-up examination, one implant and one prosthesis failed in the unsplinted group, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 97.8% at the patient level. Two minor technical complications were experienced. Conclusions: Implant overdenture retained or supported by ball attachment systems showed high implant and prosthetic survival and success rates. A low number of complications, high patient satisfaction, and successful biological parameters were experienced in the mid-term follow-up. Data need to be confirmed by further randomized trials.

scholarly journals Smoking and Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 39
Author(s):  
Abir Dunia Mustapha ◽  
Zainab Salame ◽  
Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic
Keyword(s):  
Dental Implants ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Implant Failure ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background and Objectives: Tobacco is today the single most preventable cause of death, being associated with countless diseases, including cancer and neurological, cardiovascular, and respiratory diseases. Smoking also brings negative consequences to oral health, potentially impairing treatment with dental implants. The present review aimed to evaluate the influence of smoking on dental implant failure rates and marginal bone loss (MBL). Materials and Methods: Electronic search was undertaken in three databases, plus a manual search of journals. Meta-analyses were performed, in addition to meta-regressions, in order to verify how the odds ratio (OR) and MBL were associated with follow-up time. Results: The review included 292 publications. Altogether, there were 35,511 and 114,597 implants placed in smokers and in non-smokers, respectively. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that implants in smokers had a higher failure risk in comparison with non-smokers (OR 2.402, p < 0.001). The difference in implant failure between the groups was statistically significant in the maxilla (OR 2.910, p < 0.001), as well as in the mandible (OR 2.866, p < 0.001). The MBL mean difference (MD) between the groups was 0.580 mm (p < 0.001). There was an estimated decrease of 0.001 in OR (p = 0.566) and increase of 0.004 mm (p = 0.279) in the MBL MD between groups for every additional month of follow-up, although without statistical significance. Therefore, there was no clear influence of the follow-up on the effect size (OR) and on MBL MD between groups. Conclusions: Implants placed in smokers present a 140.2% higher risk of failure than implants placed in non-smokers.

scholarly journals Dental Implants Inserted in Fresh Extraction Sockets versus Healed Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (24) ◽  
pp. 7903
Author(s):  
Adam Ibrahim ◽  
Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic
Keyword(s):  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Implant Failure ◽  
Marginal Bone Loss ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Failure Risk ◽  
Electronic Search ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

The present review aimed to evaluate the difference of dental implant failure rates and marginal bone loss (MBL) between implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets or healed sites. Electronic search was undertaken in three databases, plus manual search of journals, including studies randomized or not. Meta-analyses were performed besides meta-regressions, in order to verify how the odds ratio (OR) and MBL were associated with follow-up time. The review included 163 publications. Altogether, there were 17,278 and 38,738 implants placed in fresh extraction sockets and healed sites, respectively. Pairwise meta-analyses showed that implants in sockets had a higher failure risk in comparison to healed sites: OR 1.349, all studies included; OR 2.070, only prospective non-RCTs; OR 2.487, only RCTs (all p < 0.001). The difference in implant failure between the groups was statistically significant in the maxilla (OR 1.616, p = 0.029), but not in the mandible (OR 2.192, p = 0.075). The MBL mean difference (MD) between the groups was −0.053 mm (p = 0.089). There was an estimated decrease of 0.003 in OR (p = 0.284) and an increase of 0.006 mm (p = 0.036) in the MBL MD between groups for every additional month of follow-up. In conclusion, implants placed in fresh extraction sockets present higher risk of failure than implants placed in healed sites.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document