scholarly journals Clinical Behavior and Complications of Mandibular Full-Arch Fixed Dental Prostheses Supported by Three Dental Implants. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 308
Author(s):  
Luis Sánchez-Labrador ◽  
Pedro Molinero-Mourelle ◽  
Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann ◽  
Juan Carlos Prados-Frutos ◽  
Miguel Gómez-Polo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Behavior ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Dental Prostheses ◽  
Edentulous Mandible ◽  
Patient Reported

This systematic review and meta-analysis set out to assess the clinical behavior of mandibular implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses (ISFCDP) on three dental implants by analyzing implant and prosthetic survival rates, marginal bone loss, biological/technical complications, and patient-reported outcomes. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches were conducted in the Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, complimented by a manual search in specialist journals for relevant articles published up to February 2021. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale tool was used to assess the quality of evidence in the studies reviewed. The study included 13 articles with 728 patients treated with 2184 implants. A mean implant survival rate of 95.9% (95% CI: 94.6–97.3%) and a prosthetic survival rate of 97.0% (95% CI: 95.7–98.3%) were obtained over 1–6-year follow-up periods. Mandibular implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses on three dental implants would appear to be a viable option for restoring the edentulous mandible in comparison with mandibular ISFCDP on more than three implants. Further comparative studies are needed, with adequate protocols, as well as sufficient sample sizes and follow-up periods to confirm these findings.

scholarly journals Clinical Behavior of Ceramic, Hybrid and Composite Onlays. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (20) ◽  
pp. 7582
Author(s):  
Naia Bustamante-Hernández ◽  
Jose María Montiel-Company ◽  
Carlos Bellot-Arcís ◽  
José Félix Mañes-Ferrer ◽  
María Fernanda Solá-Ruíz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Region ◽  
Publication Date ◽  
Clinical Behavior ◽  
Lower Survival Rate ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Over Time

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to analyze the survival of onlay restorations in the posterior region, their clinical behavior according to the material used (ceramic reinforced with lithium disilicate, conventional feldspathic ceramic or reinforced with leucite; hybrid materials and composite), possible complications, and the factors influencing restoration success. The systematic review was based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, without publication date or language restrictions. An electronic search was made in the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases. After discarding duplicate publications and studies that failed to meet the inclusion criteria, the articles were selected based on the population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question. The following variables were considered in the qualitative and quantitative analyses: restoration survival rate (determined by several clinical parameters), the influence of the material used upon the clinical behavior of the restorations, and the complications recorded over follow-up. A total of 29 articles were selected for the qualitative analysis and 27 for the quantitative analysis. The estimated restoration survival rate was 94.2%. The predictors of survival were the duration of follow-up (beta = −0.001; p = 0.001) and the onlay material used (beta = −0.064; p = 0.028). Composite onlays were associated with a lower survival rate over time. Onlays are a good, conservative, and predictable option for restoring dental defects in the posterior region, with a survival rate of over 90%. The survival rate decreases over time and with the use of composite as onlay material.

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.

349 Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia in Patients with Chronic Pain - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

SLEEP ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. A139-A140
Author(s):  
Janannii Selvanathan ◽  
Chi Pham ◽  
Mahesh Nagappa ◽  
Philip Peng ◽  
Marina Englesakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral ◽  
Comorbid Insomnia ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Introduction Patients with chronic non-cancer pain often report insomnia as a significant comorbidity. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is recommended as the first line of treatment for insomnia, and several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the efficacy of CBT-I on various health outcomes in patients with comorbid insomnia and chronic non-cancer pain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of CBT-I on sleep, pain, depression, anxiety and fatigue in adults with comorbid insomnia and chronic non-cancer pain. Methods A systematic search was conducted using ten electronic databases. The duration of the search was set between database inception to April 2020. Included studies must be RCTs assessing the effects of CBT-I on at least patient-reported sleep outcomes in adults with chronic non-cancer pain. Quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment and Yates quality rating scale. Continuous data were extracted and summarized using standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results The literature search resulted in 7,772 articles, of which 14 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Twelve of these articles were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis comprised 762 participants. CBT-I demonstrated a large significant effect on patient-reported sleep (SMD = 0.87, 95% CI [0.55–1.20], p < 0.00001) at post-treatment and final follow-up (up to 9 months) (0.59 [0.31–0.86], p < 0.0001); and moderate effects on pain (SMD = 0.20 [0.06, 0.34], p = 0.006) and depression (0.44 [0.09–0.79], p= 0.01) at post-treatment. The probability of improving sleep and pain following CBT-I at post-treatment was 81% and 58%, respectively. The probability of improving sleep and pain at final follow-up was 73% and 57%, respectively. There were no statistically significant effects on anxiety and fatigue. Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that CBT-I is effective for improving sleep in adults with comorbid insomnia and chronic non-cancer pain. Further, CBT-I may lead to short-term moderate improvements in pain and depression. However, there is a need for further RCTs with adequate power, longer follow-up periods, CBT for both insomnia and pain, and consistent scoring systems for assessing patient outcomes. Support (if any):

scholarly journals Short (6 mm) and Regular Dental Implants in the Posterior Maxilla–7-Years Follow-up Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 940
Author(s):  
Jakub Hadzik ◽  
Paweł Kubasiewicz-Ross ◽  
Izabela Nawrot-Hadzik ◽  
Tomasz Gedrange ◽  
Artur Pitułaj ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Implant Survival Rate ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Bone Level

Short 6 mm dental implants are considered as an alternative to the maxillary sinus elevation and bone augmentation procedure where there is a reduced alveolar ridge height. The aim of this study was to compare the implant survival rate between short dental implants (6 mm) and regular length implants (11–13 mm) when placed in combination with bone grafting and loaded with a single non splinted crown, seven years after placing the implant. It was conducted as a controlled clinical study of 30 patients with partial edentulism in the posterior maxilla. The protocol included radiological and clinical evaluation of the C/I ratio (length of the superstructure divided by the length of the implant crestal part), marginal bone level (MBL), ultrasonography measurement of soft tissue surrounding implant (STT), patient-reported outcomes, and biological and technical complications. A total number of 28 implants (93%) remained integrated during follow-up period. MBL of 0.50 and 0.52 mm was observed for short implants and regular implants, respectively. MBL was checked for correlation with STT, and a negative correlation was found between MBL: STT. Our study has demonstrated a significantly lower implant survival rate for short implants compared to regular implants (87% compared to 100%). Despite the loss of several implants, good clinical results were achieved in the remaining implants in both groups. It is, therefore, worth considering short implants as an alternative to regular implants with a sinus lift surgery.

scholarly journals Mini-Implant-Retained Overdentures for the Rehabilitation of Completely Edentulous Maxillae: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 4377
Author(s):  
Serena Vi ◽  
Damon Pham ◽  
Yu Yian Marina Du ◽  
Himanshu Arora ◽  
Santosh Kumar Tadakamadla
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Full Text Review

Purpose: Mini-dental implants (MDIs) have been used to support and retain overdentures, providing patients with a less invasive placement procedure. Although lucrative, the use of MDIs to retain a maxillary overdenture is still not an established treatment modality. This systematic review aims to answer the question: Do mini-implant-retained maxillary overdentures provide a satisfactory treatment outcome for complete edentulism? Methods: A systematic search for relevant articles was conducted to include articles published until April 2021 in the following electronic databases: CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science. All empirical studies evaluating the biological, survival, or patient-reported outcomes after placing mini-implant-retained overdentures in maxilla were considered for inclusion. The risk of bias was assessed by utilizing the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. Study screening and data extraction were conducted by three reviewers independently. Results: The electronic search retrieved 1276 titles after omitting duplicates. Twenty articles were considered for full-text review, of which six studies were included in this systematic review. The included studies evaluated a total of 173 participants with a mean age of 66.3 years. The overall mini-implant survival rate was 77.1% (95% CI: 64.7–89.5%) with a mean follow-up time of 1.79 years (range: 6 months to 3 years). Implant survival differed significantly when comparing complete and partial palatal coverage overdentures. Those with complete palatal coverage exhibited less bone loss overall compared to partial coverage overdentures. Participants of all studies reported an increase in the quality of life and in satisfaction after rehabilitation treatment with MDIs. Conclusions: The survival rate of mini-implants retaining an overdenture in the maxilla was observed to be lower than the values reported for traditional implants in the literature. Improvements were observed in all aspects in terms of patient satisfaction, quality of life, oromyofunction, and articulation after the treatment.

scholarly journals Short implants (≤6 mm) versus longer implants with sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e029826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Yan ◽  
Xinyu Wu ◽  
Meiying Su ◽  
Fang Hua ◽  
Bin Shi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sinus Floor Elevation ◽  
Moderate Quality ◽  
Short Implants ◽  
Posterior Maxilla ◽  
Sinus Floor ◽  
Quality Evidence

ObjectivesTo compare the use of short implants (≤6 mm) in atrophic posterior maxilla versus longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data sourcesElectronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane CENTRAL. Retrospective and prospective hand searches were also performed.Eligibility criteriaRCTs comparing short implants (≤6 mm) and longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), marginal bone loss (MBL), complications and patient satisfaction.Data extraction and synthesisRisks of bias in and across studies were evaluated. Meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were undertaken. Quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.ResultsA total of seven RCTs involving 310 participants were included. No significant difference in survival rate was found for 1–3 years follow-up (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.74, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence) or for 3 years or longer follow-up (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.79, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, short implants (≤6 mm) showed significantly less MBL in 1–3 years follow-up (MD=−0.13 mm, 95% CI −0.21 to 0.05; p=0.001, I²=87%, low-quality evidence) and in 3 years or longer follow-up (MD=−0.25 mm, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.10; p=0.001, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). In addition, short implant (≤6 mm) resulted in fewer postsurgery reaction (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.31, p<0.001, I²=40%, moderate-quality evidence) and sinus perforation or infection (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.63, p=0.01, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence).ConclusionsFor atrophic posterior maxilla, short implants (≤6 mm) are a promising alternative to sinus floor elevation, with comparable survival rate, less MBL and postsurgery reactions. Additional high-quality studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of short implants (≤6 mm).Trial registeration numberThe protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD42018103531).

scholarly journals Survival Rate and Prosthetic and Sinus Complications of Zygomatic Dental Implants for the Rehabilitation of the Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 601
Author(s):  
David Gutiérrez Muñoz ◽  
Caterina Obrador Aldover ◽  
Álvaro Zubizarreta-Macho ◽  
Héctor González Menéndez ◽  
Juan Lorrio Castro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Survival ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Prosthetic Complications

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze and compare the survival rate and prosthetic and sinus complications of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla. Materials and methods: We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of clinical studies that evaluated the survival rate and prosthetic and sinus complications of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla. Four databases were consulted during the literature search: Pubmed–Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicate articles and applying the inclusion criteria, 46 articles were selected for the qualitative analysis and 32 for the quantitative analysis. Results: Four randomized controlled trials, 19 prospective clinical studies, 20 retrospective studies, and 3 case series were included in the meta-analysis. Conventional dental implants failure (n = 3549) were seen in 2.89% (IC-95% 1.83–3.96%), while zygomatic dental implants failure (n = 1895) were seen in 0.69% (IC-95% 0.21–1.16%). The measure of the effect size used was the Odds Ratio, which was estimated at 2.05 with a confidence interval of 95% between 1.22 and 3.44 (z test = 2.73; p-value = 0.006). The failure risk of conventional dental implants is 2.1 times higher than that of zygomatic dental implants. Slight heterogeneity was determined in the meta-analysis between 23 combined studies (Q test = 32.4; p-value = 0.070; I2 = 32.1%). Prosthetic complications were recorded in 4.9% (IC-95% 2.7–7.3%) and mild heterogeneity was observed in a meta-analysis of 28 combined studies (Q test = 88.2; p-value = 0.001; I2 = 69.4%). Sinus complications were seen in 4.7% (IC-95% 2.8–6.5%) and mild heterogeneity was observed in a meta-analysis of 32 combined studies (Q test = 75.3; p-value = 0.001; I2 = 58.8%). Conclusions: The high survival rate and low prosthetic and sinus complications related to zygomatic dental implants suggest the use of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla.

scholarly journals Survival of dental implants and occurrence of osteoradionecrosis in irradiated head and neck cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Jan Toneatti ◽  
Ronny Roger Graf ◽  
John-Patrik Burkhard ◽  
Benoît Schaller
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cancer Prognosis ◽  
Implant Survival

Abstract Objectives This systematic review assesses dental implant survival, calculates the incidence rate of osteoradionecrosis, and evaluates risk factors in irradiated head and neck cancer patients. Materials and methods Various databases (e.g., Medline/Embase using Ovid) and gray literature platforms were searched using a combination of keywords and subject headings. When appropriate, meta-analysis was carried out using a random effects model. Otherwise, pooled analysis was applied. Results A total of 425 of the 660 included patients received radiotherapy. In total, 2602 dental implants were placed, and 1637 were placed in irradiated patients. Implant survival after an average follow-up of 37.7 months was 97% (5% confidence interval, CI 95.2%, 95% CI 98.3%) in nonirradiated patients and 91.9% (5% CI 87.7%, 95% CI: 95.3%) after an average follow-up of 39.8 months in irradiated patients. Osteoradionecrosis occurred in 11 cases, leading to an incidence of 3% (5% CI 1.6%, 95% CI 4.9%). The main factors impacting implant survival were radiation and grafting status, while factors influencing osteoradionecrosis could not be determined using meta-analysis. Conclusion Our data show that implant survival in irradiated patients is lower than in nonirradiated patients, and osteoradionecrosis is—while rare—a serious complication that any OMF surgeon should be prepared for. The key to success could be a standardized patient selection and therapy to improve the standard of care, reduce risks and shorten treatment time. Clinical relevance Our analysis provides further evidence that implant placement is a feasible treatment option in irradiated head and neck cancer patients with diminished oral function and good long-term cancer prognosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document