A systematic review on marginal bone loss around short dental implants (<10 mm) for implant‐supported fixed prostheses

Clinical Oral Implants Research - Tập 25 Số 10 - Trang 1119-1124 - 2014
Alberto Monje1, Fernando Suárez1, Pablo Galindo‐Moreno2, Agustín García Nogales3, Jia Fu4, Hom‐Lay Wang1
1Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
2Department of Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry University of Granada Granada Spain
3Department of Mathematics (Biostatistics) School of Medicine University of Extremadura Badajoz Spain
4School of Dentistry National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore

Tóm tắt

AbstractPurposeThis systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of implant length on peri‐implant marginal bone loss (MBL) and its associated influencing factors.Material and methodsAn electronic search of the PubMed and MEDLINE databases for relevant studies published in English from November 2006 to July 2012 was performed by one examiner (AM). Selected studies were randomized clinical trials, human experimental clinical trials or prospective studies (e.g., cohort as well as case series) with a clear aim of investigating marginal bone loss of short dental implants (<10 mm) supporting fixed prostheses. A random‐effect meta‐regression model was used to determine the relationship between the effect size mean MBL and the covariate “implant length.” Additionally, a subgroup analysis, by means of a random‐effect one‐way ANOVA model, comparing mean MBL values at different levels of each factor (“type of connection” and “type of prostheses”) was also performed.ResultsThe meta‐regression of mean MBL on the moderator “implant length” was found to be insignificant (P = 0.633). Therefore, it could not be concluded that implant length had an effect on peri‐implant MBL. In addition, standardized differences in mean MBL on the subgroups short (<10 mm) and standard (≥10 mm) implants, as determined by the meta‐analysis (random‐effect model), were found to be statistically insignificant (P = 0.222).ConclusionsWithin limitations of the present systematic review, it could be concluded that short dental implants (<10 mm) had similar peri‐implant MBL as standard implants (≥10 mm) for implant‐supported fixed prostheses.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Albrektsson T., 1986, Osseointegrated dental implants, Dental Clinics of North America, 30, 151, 10.1016/S0011-8532(22)02100-0

10.1177/0022034511425675

10.1902/jop.2010.100232

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01762.x

Borenstein M., 2009, Introduction to Meta‐Analysis, 49, 10.1002/9780470743386

Canullo L., 2010, Immediate positioning of a definitive abutment versus repeated abutment replacements in post‐extractive implants: 3‐year follow‐up of a randomised multicentre clinical trial, European Journal of Oral Implantology, 3, 285

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01210.x

10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60142-4

Clelland N.L., 1993, A photoelastic and strain gauge analysis of angled abutments for an implant system, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 8, 541

Esposito M., 2011, Rehabilitation of posterior atrophic edentulous jaws: prostheses supported by 5 mm short implants or by longer implants in augmented bone? One‐year results from a pilot randomised clinical trial, European Journal of Oral Implantology, 4, 21

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01148.x

10.1111/clr.12001

10.1902/jop.2004.75.6.798

10.1515/bmt.2010.049

10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070208.x

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01360.x

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01067.x

10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00182.x

Lum L.B., 1991, A biomechanical rationale for the use of short implants, The Journal of Oral Implantology, 17, 126

10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01545.x

10.1902/jop.2012.120328

10.1902/jop.2013.120745

10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70243-X

10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2012.02562.x

10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00155.x

10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01750.x

Qian L., 2009, Effects of implant diameter, insertion depth, and loading angle on stress/strain fields in implant/jawbone systems: finite element analysis, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 24, 877

10.1111/cid.12014

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01349.x

10.1016/0022-3913(90)90325-7

Romeo E., 2006, Short (8‐mm) dental implants in the rehabilitation of partial and complete edentulism: a 3‐ to 14‐year longitudinal study, The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 19, 586

10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01942.x

10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z

Sun H.L., 2011, Failure rates of short (≤10 mm) dental implants and factors influencing their failure: a systematic review, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 26, 816

Telleman G., 2011, Short implants with a nanometer‐sized CaP surface provided with either a platform‐switched or platform‐matched abutment connection in the posterior region: a randomized clinical trial, Clinical Oral Implants Research, 38, 667

10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01736.x

Yilmaz B., 2011, Comparison of strains for splinted and nonsplinted screw‐retained prostheses on short implants, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 26, 1176

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Clinical Oral Implants Research

Tập 25 Số 10

1119-1124

Thông tin tác giả