Minimal invasiveness at dental implant placement: A systematic review with meta‐analyses on flapless fully guided surgery

Romandini, Mario; Ruales‐Carrera, Edwin; Sadilina, Sofya; Hämmerle, Christoph H.F.; Sanz, Mariano

doi:10.1111/prd.12440

Cited by 32 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(524 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…51 Furthermore, this systematic review did not consider outcomes such as implant survival, patient-reported outcome measures, incidence of peri-implant diseases, costs, and esthetics, despite their potential influence on decision-making. 52 Finally, it is important to note that the evaluation of bone reconstructions in severely resorbed sockets fell beyond the scope of the present review.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation with xenografts and resorbable socket sealing materials in the esthetic region: A systematic review with meta‐analyses

Apaza‐Bedoya,

Magrin,

Romandini

et al. 2023

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimThe present systematic review aimed to identify and summarize the clinical, radiographic, and histological outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation using bone xenografts and absorbable sealing materials compared with spontaneous healing in the esthetic zone.Materials and methodsRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) fulfilling specific eligibility criteria were included. Two review authors independently searched for eligible studies, extracted data from the published reports and performed the risk of bias assessment (RoB 2 tool). Study results were summarized using random effects meta‐analyses.ResultsThirteen articles concerning 10 RCTs were included, involving a total of 357 participants. Most of studies were considered as “low” risk of bias. Meta‐analyses indicated less horizontal (difference in means—MD = 1.88 mm; p < 0.001), vertical mid‐buccal (MD = 1.84 mm; p < 0.001) and vertical mid‐lingual (MD = 2.27 mm; p < 0.001) bone resorption in alveolar ridge preservation compared to spontaneous healing as assessed clinically. Bone changes assessed radiographically showed consistent results in terms of horizontal (at 1 mm: MD = 1.84 mm, p < 0.001), vertical mid‐buccal (MD = 0.95 mm; p < 0.001) and mid‐lingual (MD = 0.62 mm; p = 0.05) resorption. Part of the bone resorption in the spontaneous healing group was compensated by soft‐tissues, since the observed differences between groups in linear ridge reduction evaluated through cast models superimposition were smaller (MD = 0.52 mm; p < 0.001).ConclusionsAlveolar ridge preservation with xenogeneic bone substitutes and non‐autogenous resorbable socket sealing materials is efficacious in reducing post‐extraction bone and ridge changes in the esthetic region.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation with xenografts and resorbable socket sealing materials in the esthetic region: A systematic review with meta‐analyses

Apaza‐Bedoya,

Magrin,

Romandini

et al. 2023

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Publication bias was investigated through funnel plot visualization. This was possible because all meta‐analyses had <10 studies included, thus preventing the use of the Egger's and Begg's tests 25 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was possible because all meta-analyses had <10 studies included, thus preventing the use of the Egger's and Begg's tests. 25 3 | RESULTS…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Across Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival and complications of zygomatic implants compared to conventional implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow‐up period of at least 5 years: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Moraschini

Queiroz

Sartoretto

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Zygomatic implants (ZI) have been frequently indicated to rehabilitate patients with extensive atrophies in alternatives to major bone reconstructions. It can be installed inside the maxillary sinus, called instrasinus zygomatic implant (IZI) or outside the maxillary sinus (EZI), depending on the surgery technique. Objective To evaluate the survival and complication rates of ZI in longitudinal studies when compared with conventional implants (CI). Methods An electronic search was performed in five databases and in Gray literature for articles published until April, 2022. The eligibility criteria comprised observational cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with at least 5 years of follow‐up, reporting survival rate of ZI versus CI. A meta‐analysis was conduct with 18 studies. Results A total of 5434 implants (2972 ZI and 2462 CI) were analyzed in 1709 patients. The mean survival rate was 96.5% ± 5.02 and 95.8% ± 6.36 for ZI and CI, respectively (mean follow‐up time of 78 months). There were observed no statistically significant between ZI and CI in prospective studies (risk ratio [RR] of 1.21; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 0.28 to 5.28; chi‐squared [Chi2] = 11.37; I2 = 56%; degrees of freedom [df] = 5; z‐score = 0.25; P = 0.80), retrospective studies IZI (RR of 1.29; 95% CIs: 0.52 to 3.23; Chi2 = 4.07; I2 = 2%; df = 4; z‐score = 0.55; P = 0.58) and retrospective studies EZI (RR of 0.72; 95% CIs: 0.31 to 1.66; Chi2 = 1.99; I2 = 0%; df = 3; z‐score = 0.78; P = 0.44). The biological complications most related to ZI was sinusitis, followed by infection and oroantral communication. Conclusion ZI have a high long‐term survival rate (96.5% with a mean of 91.5 months of follow‐up), showing no significant difference when compared with CI. The most prevalent biological complication is sinusitis, being most commonly to the IZI technique. This systematic review (SR) was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202280025.

show abstract

“…A modern patient-centered focus of implant dentistry lies on less invasive treatment options in order to reduce treatment time (Frizzera et al 2021), patient morbidity (Romandini et al 2022), and costs (Pauletto et al 2021). Especially the use of shorter implants to entail a lower risk for potential damage of neighboring structures and to bypass bone augmentation procedures in atrophic jaws has reduced both complications and patient morbidity (Thoma et al 2017; Romandini et al 2022). While short dental implants were shown to perform well over short periods (Sahrmann et al 2016; Thoma et al 2021), long-term observations are still lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten-Year Performance of Posterior 6-mm Implants with Single-Tooth Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Trial

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of short dental implants (6-mm test group, TG) to longer implants (10-mm control group, CG) with single crown restorations after 10 y of loading. Patients requiring single-tooth replacement in the posterior jaws were randomly assigned to TG or CG. Implants were loaded with screw-retained single crowns after a healing period of 10 wk. Follow-up appointments were scheduled yearly and comprised patient-adapted oral hygiene reinstructions and polishing of all teeth and implants. After 10 y, clinical and radiographical parameters were assessed again. Out of initially 94 patients (47 in TG and CG, each), 70 (36 TG and 34 CG) could be reassessed. Survival rates accounted for 85.7% (TG) and 97.1% (CG), without significant intergroup difference ( P = 0.072). All but 1 lost implant had been located in the lower jaw. These implants were not lost due to peri-implantitis but due to a late loss of osseointegration without signs of inflammation and with actually stable marginal bone levels (MBLs) over the investigation period. In general, MBLs were stable with medians (interquartile ranges) of 0.13 (0.78) mm and 0.08 (1.2) mm, for TG and CG, without significant intergroup differences. Crown-to-implant ratio showed a highly significant intergroup difference of 1.06 ± 0.18 mm and 0.73 ± 0.17 mm ( P < 0.001). Few technical complications (i.e., screw loosening or chipping) were registered during the investigation period. In conclusion, given stringent professional maintenance, short dental implants with single-crown restorations show a slightly worse but statistically not different survival rate after 10 y, especially in the lower jaw, but can still be considered a valuable alternative, especially when vertical bone dimensions are limited (German Clinical Trials Registry: DRKS00006290).

show abstract

Minimal invasiveness at dental implant placement: A systematic review with meta‐analyses on flapless fully guided surgery

Cited by 32 publications

References 38 publications

Efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation with xenografts and resorbable socket sealing materials in the esthetic region: A systematic review with meta‐analyses

Efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation with xenografts and resorbable socket sealing materials in the esthetic region: A systematic review with meta‐analyses

Survival and complications of zygomatic implants compared to conventional implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow‐up period of at least 5 years: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Ten-Year Performance of Posterior 6-mm Implants with Single-Tooth Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About