Cargando…

The minipig intraoral dental implant model: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this report was to provide a review of the minipig intraoral dental implant model including a meta-analysis to estimate osseointegration and crestal bone remodeling. METHODS: A systematic review including PubMed and EMBASE databases through June 2021 was conducted. Two i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Musskopf, Marta Liliana, Finger Stadler, Amanda, Wikesjö, Ulf ME, Susin, Cristiano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8884544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35226690
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264475
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: The objective of this report was to provide a review of the minipig intraoral dental implant model including a meta-analysis to estimate osseointegration and crestal bone remodeling. METHODS: A systematic review including PubMed and EMBASE databases through June 2021 was conducted. Two independent examiners screened titles/abstracts and selected full-text articles. Studies evaluating titanium dental implant osseointegration in native alveolar bone were included. A quality assessment of reporting was performed. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were produced for bone-implant contact (BIC), first BIC, and crestal bone level. RESULTS: 125 out of 249 full-text articles were reviewed, 55 original studies were included. Quality of reporting was generally low, omissions included animal characteristics, examiner masking/calibration, and sample size calculation. The typical minipig model protocol included surgical extraction of the mandibular premolars and first molar, 12±4 wks post-extraction healing, placement of three narrow regular length dental implants per jaw quadrant, submerged implant healing and 8 wks of osseointegration. Approximately 90% of studies reported undecalcified incandescent light microscopy histometrics. Overall, mean BIC was 59.88% (95%CI: 57.43–62.33). BIC increased significantly over time (p<0.001): 40.93 (95%CI: 34.95–46.90) at 2 wks, 58.37% (95%CI: 54.38–62.36) at 4 wks, and 66.33% (95%CI: 63.45–69.21) beyond 4 wks. Variability among studies was mainly explained by differences in observation interval post-extraction and post-implant placement, and implant surface. Heterogeneity was high for all studies (I(2) > 90%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The minipig intraoral dental implant model appears to effectively demonstrate osseointegration and alveolar bone remodeling similar to that observed in humans and canine models.