Comparison of survival rate and crestal bone loss of narrow diameter dental implants versus regular dental implants: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Alrabiah, Mohammed

doi:10.1111/jicd.12367

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The promising results of narrow diameter implants (NDI) as implantretained mandibular overdenture (IMO) retainers led to a consensus in literature to indicate NDI for the treatment of edentulous patients with limited bone availability. [1][2][3][4] Although conventional loading (CL) has been adopted in most previous studies, the inconvenience of a long healing period led to the adoption of immediate loading (IML) in overdentures retained by two implants, as IML has been shown to be a clinically viable and successful treatment option. [5][6][7] However, the precise benefits associated with each type of loading are still unclear, especially for edentulous patients with advanced age.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immediate vs conventional loading of Facility‐Equator system in mandibular overdenture wearers: 1‐year RCT with clinical, biological, and functional evaluation

Schuster

Marcello-Machado

Bielemann

et al. 2020

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The use of immediate loading (IML) is still poorly explored in elderly patients and implant-retained mandibular overdenture (IMO) wearers. For this reason, more comparisons to conventional loading (CL) are required. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical, biological, functional, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQOL) influence of CL and IML loading on elders wearing IMO retained by the Facility-Equator system up to 1 year after implant installation. Material and Methods: Twenty edentulous patients received two narrow diameter implants in the mandible; the loading type (CL or IML) was randomized. The clinical parameters were monitored along with prosthetic events, marginal bone loss (MBL) and bone level change (BLC), implant stability quotients (ISQ), masticatory performance outcomes, and Interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) levels in the peri-implant crevicular fluid during the first year of loading. The OHRQoL was assessed via the Oral Health Impact Profile-EDENT questionnaire. Data were analyzed by the Mann-Whitney, χ 2 , Wilcoxon paired, and McNemar tests. Results: After 1 year, MBL, BLC and ISQ were statistically identical (P > .05) in the CL and IML groups. The probing depth at 12 months in the CL group (2.19 mm) was higher than in the IML group (1.29 mm; P ≤ .0001). TNF-α was 33.6% higher in the CL group at 6 months (P = .043), while IL-1β was significantly higher in the IML group up to 6 months. The survival rate was 90% in the CL group and 85% in the IML group; 33 prosthetic events occurred in CL group and 23 in IML group. Conclusions: After 12 months, both loading protocols are viable and result in similar clinical, biological, functional, and OHRQOL outcomes. However, IML generates better adaptation of the peri-implant tissues, faster improvement in OHRQoL and fewer prosthetic intercurrences than CL.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immediate vs conventional loading of Facility‐Equator system in mandibular overdenture wearers: 1‐year RCT with clinical, biological, and functional evaluation

Schuster

Marcello-Machado

Bielemann

et al. 2020

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, some researchers investigated clinical outcomes of NDIs into the posterior jaws and reported 100% success rate . Recent systematic reviews and meta‐analyses revealed comparable clinical and radiographic status of NDIs and RDIs including in posterior load‐bearing regions …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Al‐Aali

ArRejaie

Alrahlah

et al. 2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Studies assessing and comparing clinical and radiographic peri‐implant status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single crowns (NDISCs) and splinted crowns (NDISPs) are scarce. Objective The aim of this retrospective study was to estimate and compare complication rates, patient satisfaction, peri‐implant status and peri‐implant bone loss (PBL) of NDISCs and NDISPs. Materials and Methods Patients receiving narrow diameter implants (NDIs) in the posterior mandible were assessed. Technical complication and patient satisfaction were recorded. Clinical peri‐implant plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), probing depth (PD) and PBL were assessed. Technical complications and patient satisfaction were recorded. Log‐rank test was computed to evaluate the influence of prostheses type and NDIs location on technical complications. P‐value less than 0.05 was regarded as significant. Results Seventy‐eight patients (43 male and 35 females) agreed to follow up. The mean follow‐up duration of the patients was 3.6 years. A total of 102 (43 NDISCs and 59 NDISPs) NDIs with moderately rough surfaces were included. No significant differences in PI, BoP, or PD were observed between NDISCs and NDISPs. The average PBL score was 1.17 (range: 0.03‐4.15) at implant level and 1.14 (range: 0.03‐4.14) at patient level. Seven implants and three patients showed peri‐implantitis. The rates of technical complication of single crowns were significantly higher than those of splinted crowns (P = 0.036). PBL was significantly higher in molar sites than those in premolar sites (P = 0.041). A total of 67 patients (85.9%) were satisfied with the esthetics of the crowns, while a total of 59 patients (75.6%) were satisfied with the function of the crowns. Conclusion NDISCs and NDISPs offer high patient satisfaction and tolerable complication rates. Peri‐implant conditions and peri‐implant bone levels were comparable around NDISCs and NDISPs. However, bone loss of implants was higher in molar sites than those implants in premolar sites.

show abstract

“…A previous systematic review with meta-analysis published addressing the comparison narrow-diameter (≤3.3-mm) versus standard-diameter implants [20,21]. In general, these studies showed no difference in longevity and marginal bone loss between diameters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longevity and marginal bone loss of narrow-diameter implants supporting single crowns: A systematic review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To compare the longevity and marginal bone loss of narrow-diameter (�3.3-mm) versus standard-diameter implants supporting single crowns. Material and methods The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, and SciELO databases were searched for relevant publications. In addition, the scientific references provided by each of the implant companies that appeared in the search were reviewed. Intervention studies comparing longevity and bone loss between narrow-diameter and standard-diameter implants were included. Results The search was limited to in vivo studies in humans. The query returned 1931 results, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. The implant success rate ranged from 93.8% to 100% over a maximum follow-up of 3 years, with no difference between narrow-and standarddiameter implants. Meta-analysis of all included studies showed greater bone loss in narrow-diameter implants as compared with standard ones; however, when analysis was restricted to randomized trials, no such difference was present.

show abstract

Comparison of survival rate and crestal bone loss of narrow diameter dental implants versus regular dental implants: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Cited by 21 publications

References 30 publications

Immediate vs conventional loading of Facility‐Equator system in mandibular overdenture wearers: 1‐year RCT with clinical, biological, and functional evaluation

Immediate vs conventional loading of Facility‐Equator system in mandibular overdenture wearers: 1‐year RCT with clinical, biological, and functional evaluation

Clinical and radiographic peri‐implant health status around narrow diameter implant‐supported single and splinted crowns

Longevity and marginal bone loss of narrow-diameter implants supporting single crowns: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About