Influence of Laser-Microtextured Surface Collar on Marginal Bone Loss and Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background Nowadays, due to the esthetic and social demands of patients, conventional staged protocols seem to be increasingly replaced by faster, one-step protocols. The purpose of the present systematic review is to assess the peri-implant soft tissue changes after immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) comparing patients treated with or without a sub-epithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) when replacing a single tooth in the esthetic region. Methods The present systematic review was written following the PRISMA checklist. Immediate implants placed with a connective tissue graft and without one were compared. The researched primary outcomes were the mid-buccal mucosa level (MBML) facial soft tissue thickness (FSTT) and marginal bone loss (MBL). The weighted mean differences (WMD) were estimated for all three outcomes. Results The change in the mid-buccal mucosa level in the intervention group was significantly higher (WMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.33–0.75), with no indication of heterogeneity (I2 = 16%). The facial soft tissue thickness increased significantly in the intervention group (WMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.37–1.22). The marginal bone loss was significantly higher in the control group (WMD 0.13; 95% CI 0.07–0.18), with no indication of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Conclusions The results of the meta-analyses showed a statistically significant reduced change of the marginal bone loss and vestibular recession, as well as higher soft tissue thickness, when a graft was used. The included studies had a short observation time; therefore, studies with longer follow-ups are needed to confirm these findings.

Download Full-text

Marginal bone loss around dental implants with and without microthreads in the neck: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry ◽

10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.07.003 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 117 (1) ◽

pp. 34-40 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Wenzhi Niu ◽

Penglai Wang ◽

Shaoyue Zhu ◽

Zongxiang Liu ◽

Ping Ji

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bone Loss ◽

Dental Implants ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Marginal Bone Loss

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Implant Collar Surfaces for Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2016/4987526 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2016 ◽

pp. 1-10 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Roodabeh Koodaryan ◽

Ali Hafezeqoran

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bone Loss ◽

Dental Implants ◽

Retrospective Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Marginal Bone Loss ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Present Systematic Review

Background. It is important to understand the influence of different collar designs on peri-implant marginal bone loss, especially in the critical area.Objectives. The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare dental implants with different collar surfaces, evaluating marginal bone loss and survival rates of implants.Methods. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective studies, which evaluated dental implants with different collar surface in the same study.Results. Twelve articles were included, with a total of 492 machined, 319 rough-surfaced, and 352 rough-surfaced microthreaded neck implants. There was less marginal bone loss at implants with rough-surfaced and rough-surfaced microthreaded neck than at machined-neck implants (difference in means: 0.321, 95% CI: 0.149 to 0.493;p<0.01).Conclusion. Rough and rough-surfaced microthreaded implants are considered a predictable treatment for preserving early marginal bone loss.

Download Full-text

Bone Loss in Implants Placed at Subcrestal and Crestal Level: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Materials ◽

10.3390/ma12010154 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 154 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Natalia Palacios-Garzón ◽

Eugenio Velasco-Ortega ◽

José López-López

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bone Loss ◽

Randomized Control Trial ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

High Survival ◽

Random Effects Model ◽

High Survival Rate ◽

Marginal Bone Loss ◽

Crestal Bone Loss ◽

Randomized Control

Background: To assess differences in marginal bone loss in implants placed at subcrestal versus crestal level. Methods: An electronic and a manual research of articles written in English from Jaunary 2010 to January 2018 was performed by two independent reviewers. Clinical trials comparing bone loss for implants placed at crestal and subcrestal level were included. Pooled estimates from comparable studies were analyzed using a continuous random-effects model meta-analysis with the objective of assessing differences in crestal bone loss between the two vertical positions. Results: 16 studies were included; 10 studies did not encounter statistically significant differences between the two groups with respect to bone loss. Three articles found greater bone loss in subcrestal implants; while 3 found more bone loss in crestal implants. A meta-analysis for randomized control trial (RCT) studies reported an average and non-statistically different crestal bone loss of 0.028 mm. Conclusions: A high survival rate and a comparable bone loss was obtained both for crestal and subcrestal implants’ placement. Quantitative analysis considering a homogenous sample confirms that both vertical positions are equally valid in terms of perimplant bone loss. However, with respect to soft tissue; in presence of a thin tissue; a subcrestal placement of the implant should be preferred as it may reduce the probability for the implant to become exposed in the future and thus avoid the risk of suffering from peri-implant pathologies.

Download Full-text