Use of Narrow-Diameter Implants in Completely Edentulous Patients as a Prosthetic Option: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Abstract

Objective. The objective of the present review is to assess the implant survival, marginal bone loss, and biomechanical features of narrow-diameter implants (2.5-3.5 mm) supporting or retaining full-arch fixed or removable restorations. Materials and Methods. Three operators screened the literature (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) and performed a hand search on the main journals that focus on implantology until 24 March 2019. Only articles that considered full-arch restorations supported or retained by narrow-diameter implants (2.5-3.5 mm) were considered if they have a minimum of 10 patients and a mean follow-up of at least 6 months. The outcome variables were survival of implants and marginal bone loss. The review was performed according to the PRISMA statements. Risk of bias assessment was evaluated. Failure rates were analyzed using random effect Poisson regression models to obtain the summary estimate of 5-year survival rate and marginal bone loss. Results. A total of nine papers were finally selected, reporting a high survival rate of the implants. Eight studies focused only on the mandible while one study reported data from both mandible and maxilla. All studies reported on removable restorations; none focused on fixed rehabilitations. The estimated survival rate for 5 years of follow-up was calculated to be 92.25% for the implants. The estimated marginal bone loss after 5 years was calculated to be 1.40 mm. No study reported implant fractures. Conclusions. With the limitations of the present study, there is evidence that 2.5-3.5 mm narrow-diameter implants retaining a removable restoration can be a successful treatment in fully edentulous patients. No data on fixed restorations was available.

Immediate full-arch fixed rehabilitation of a narrow mandible with newly conceived connection system implants: A case report

“… 22 No cases of fixed rehabilitation on these devices have been reported in the literature until now. 5 …”

“…The most frequently described indications were the edentulous arch and single arch non‐load‐bearing teeth in the anterior region. 4 , 5 The reported mean survival rate was 94.7 ± 5% (range: 80%–100%) with a mean follow‐up of 34 ± 20 months (range: 12-78 months). 4 Only one study indicated an implant success rate of 92.9% with a mean marginal bone loss ranging from 0.6 to 1.43 mm.…”

“… 4 Only one study indicated an implant success rate of 92.9% with a mean marginal bone loss ranging from 0.6 to 1.43 mm. 5 A further problem is the implant divergence since the position of the fixtures must depend on the residual bone, with difficulties in obtaining complete passivation of the prosthesis. 6 A screwed retention system cannot fasten the snap-joint connection of a mini-implant after the engagement with intermediate flat abutments.…”

Pre-Prosthetic Surgery For Dental Rehabilitation. Review article

“…Por el contrario, los pacientes tratados en condiciones de control generalmente son rehabilitados con tratamientos y procedimientos básicos sin refuerzo de estructuras o derivaciones prolongadas. (18) Tabla 1. Resumen de documentos incluidos para revisión (2019) (9) España Artículo de revisión Utilización de dentina autógena como material de injerto en cirugías bucal Conocer el estado actual del empleo de dentina como injerto autógeno en diferentes procedimientos en cirugía bucal.…”

“…Bien indicado y planificado, permite la fabricación de más prótesis estables evitando molestias y lesiones. Es un tema importante, con cierta escasez de datos en la literatura, siendo necesario más estudios publicados 11 Storelli S, Caputo A, Palandrani G, Peditto M, Del Fabbro M, Romeo E & Oteri G. (2021) (18) Italia Artículo de revisión Use of narrow-diameter implants in completely edentulous patients as a prosthetic option: a systematic review of the literature Evaluar la supervivencia del implante, la pérdida ósea marginal y las características bio-mecánicas de implantes de diámetro estrecho que soportan o retienen restauraciones fijas o removibles de arcada completa Con las limitaciones del presente estudio, hay pruebas que los implantes de 2,5-3,5 mm de diámetro estrecho retienen una restauración removible, pudiendo ser un tratamiento exitoso en pacientes totalmente desdentados. No se disponía de datos sobre restauraciones fijas.…”