Cargando…

Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review

AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants of fixed (FISP) versus removable implant-supported prosthesis (RISP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the literat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Saravi, Babak E., Putz, Maria, Patzelt, Sebastian, Alkalak, Amir, Uelkuemen, Sara, Boeker, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7266905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32488421
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00217-7
_version_ 1783541392983719936
author Saravi, Babak E.
Putz, Maria
Patzelt, Sebastian
Alkalak, Amir
Uelkuemen, Sara
Boeker, Martin
author_facet Saravi, Babak E.
Putz, Maria
Patzelt, Sebastian
Alkalak, Amir
Uelkuemen, Sara
Boeker, Martin
author_sort Saravi, Babak E.
collection PubMed
description AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants of fixed (FISP) versus removable implant-supported prosthesis (RISP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the literature on Web of Science and Ovid (MEDLINE) was conducted in March 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials/quasi-randomized trials, prospective and retrospective studies written in German and English. Two reviewers screened the identified papers for eligibility and performed an independent data extraction. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the level of evidence of the included studies. RESULTS: The search resulted in 2577 studies, of which 42 were selected for full-text evaluation. Finally, six studies were included in qualitative analyses, reporting results from 248 participants (81 FISP versus 167 RISP). Five of the included studies were prospective and one study was retrospective. MBL was highest in the first year after implant placement and ranged from 0.17 ± 0.07 mm to 2.1 ± 1.6 mm in FISP and from 0.22 ± 0.55 mm to 2.5 ± 2.7 mm in RISP. After 4 years, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups; MBL ranged from 0.36 ± 0.22 mm to 1.5 mm in FISP and 0.56 ± 0.45 mm to 1.4 mm in RISP. Of the six included studies, two each were rated as good quality, fair quality, and poor quality. CONCLUSION: Fixed and removable implant-supported prostheses seem to have similar long-term outcomes regarding marginal bone loss. However, the evidence provided in this systematic review is limited due to the poor quality of two of the included studies. Future studies with study designs specified to the topic of this review are necessary to provide clear information about marginal bone level alterations in modern implant therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7266905
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72669052020-06-15 Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review Saravi, Babak E. Putz, Maria Patzelt, Sebastian Alkalak, Amir Uelkuemen, Sara Boeker, Martin Int J Implant Dent Review AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants of fixed (FISP) versus removable implant-supported prosthesis (RISP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the literature on Web of Science and Ovid (MEDLINE) was conducted in March 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials/quasi-randomized trials, prospective and retrospective studies written in German and English. Two reviewers screened the identified papers for eligibility and performed an independent data extraction. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the level of evidence of the included studies. RESULTS: The search resulted in 2577 studies, of which 42 were selected for full-text evaluation. Finally, six studies were included in qualitative analyses, reporting results from 248 participants (81 FISP versus 167 RISP). Five of the included studies were prospective and one study was retrospective. MBL was highest in the first year after implant placement and ranged from 0.17 ± 0.07 mm to 2.1 ± 1.6 mm in FISP and from 0.22 ± 0.55 mm to 2.5 ± 2.7 mm in RISP. After 4 years, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups; MBL ranged from 0.36 ± 0.22 mm to 1.5 mm in FISP and 0.56 ± 0.45 mm to 1.4 mm in RISP. Of the six included studies, two each were rated as good quality, fair quality, and poor quality. CONCLUSION: Fixed and removable implant-supported prostheses seem to have similar long-term outcomes regarding marginal bone loss. However, the evidence provided in this systematic review is limited due to the poor quality of two of the included studies. Future studies with study designs specified to the topic of this review are necessary to provide clear information about marginal bone level alterations in modern implant therapy. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7266905/ /pubmed/32488421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00217-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Review
Saravi, Babak E.
Putz, Maria
Patzelt, Sebastian
Alkalak, Amir
Uelkuemen, Sara
Boeker, Martin
Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title_full Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title_fullStr Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title_short Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
title_sort marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7266905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32488421
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00217-7
work_keys_str_mv AT saravibabake marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview
AT putzmaria marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview
AT patzeltsebastian marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview
AT alkalakamir marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview
AT uelkuemensara marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview
AT boekermartin marginalbonelossaroundoralimplantssupportingfixedversusremovableprosthesesasystematicreview