Retention of Mandibular Complete Overdentures using Mini Dental Implants (Ø < 3 mm) and Standard Diameter Implants (Ø > 3mm): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Oral health & preventive dentistry Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.3290/j.ohpd.b5282167
Suha Mohammed Aljudaibi, Mohammad Abdullah Zayed Alqhtani, Asmaa Saleh Almeslet, Omir Aldowah, Khalid Dhafer S Alhendi
{"title":"Retention of Mandibular Complete Overdentures using Mini Dental Implants (Ø < 3 mm) and Standard Diameter Implants (Ø > 3mm): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.","authors":"Suha Mohammed Aljudaibi, Mohammad Abdullah Zayed Alqhtani, Asmaa Saleh Almeslet, Omir Aldowah, Khalid Dhafer S Alhendi","doi":"10.3290/j.ohpd.b5282167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which assessed the efficacy of mini dental implants (MDIs) and standard-diameter implants (SDIs) in retaining mandibular overdentures (MO).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The focused question was \"Is there a difference in the mechanical stability between MDIs and SDIs in retaining MO?\" Indexed databases were searched up to and including November 2023 using different keywords. Boolean operators were used during the search. The literature was searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The PICO characteristics were: patients (P) = individuals with complete mandibular dentures requiring dental implants; Intervention (I) = placement of MDIs under mandibular dentures; Control (C) = placement of SDIs under mandibular dentures; Outcome (O) = comparison of stability between MDIs and SDIs in supporting mandibular dentures. Only RCTs were included. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five RCTs were included. The numbers of participants ranged between 45 and 120 edentulous individuals wearing complete mandibular dentures. The mean age of patients ranged between 59.5 ± 8.5 and 68.3 ± 8.5 years. The number of MDIs and SDIs ranged between 22 and 152 and 10 and 80 implants, respectively. The follow-up duration ranged between one week and 12 months. Three RCTs reported an improvement in the quality of life (QoL) of all patients after stabilisation of mandibular dentures using MDIs or SDIs. In one RCT, peri-implant soft tissue profiles were comparable between MDIs and SDIs at the 1-year follow-up. The implant survival rate was reported in two RCTs, which were from 89% to 98% and 99% to 100% for MDIs and SDIs, respectively. All RCTs had a low RoB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mini dental implants represent a viable alternative to traditional standard-diameter implants when seeking optimal retention for mandibular overdentures.</p>","PeriodicalId":19696,"journal":{"name":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.ohpd.b5282167","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which assessed the efficacy of mini dental implants (MDIs) and standard-diameter implants (SDIs) in retaining mandibular overdentures (MO).

Materials and methods: The focused question was "Is there a difference in the mechanical stability between MDIs and SDIs in retaining MO?" Indexed databases were searched up to and including November 2023 using different keywords. Boolean operators were used during the search. The literature was searched in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The PICO characteristics were: patients (P) = individuals with complete mandibular dentures requiring dental implants; Intervention (I) = placement of MDIs under mandibular dentures; Control (C) = placement of SDIs under mandibular dentures; Outcome (O) = comparison of stability between MDIs and SDIs in supporting mandibular dentures. Only RCTs were included. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool.

Results: Five RCTs were included. The numbers of participants ranged between 45 and 120 edentulous individuals wearing complete mandibular dentures. The mean age of patients ranged between 59.5 ± 8.5 and 68.3 ± 8.5 years. The number of MDIs and SDIs ranged between 22 and 152 and 10 and 80 implants, respectively. The follow-up duration ranged between one week and 12 months. Three RCTs reported an improvement in the quality of life (QoL) of all patients after stabilisation of mandibular dentures using MDIs or SDIs. In one RCT, peri-implant soft tissue profiles were comparable between MDIs and SDIs at the 1-year follow-up. The implant survival rate was reported in two RCTs, which were from 89% to 98% and 99% to 100% for MDIs and SDIs, respectively. All RCTs had a low RoB.

Conclusion: Mini dental implants represent a viable alternative to traditional standard-diameter implants when seeking optimal retention for mandibular overdentures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用迷你种植体(直径小于 3 毫米)和标准直径种植体(直径大于 3 毫米)固位下颌全覆盖义齿:随机对照试验的系统回顾和元分析》。
目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验评估了微型牙种植体(MDI)和标准直径种植体(SDI)在固位下颌覆盖义齿(MO)方面的功效:重点问题是:"MDI 和 SDI 在固定 MO 的机械稳定性方面是否存在差异?使用不同的关键词检索了截至 2023 年 11 月(含)的索引数据库。搜索过程中使用了布尔运算符。文献搜索符合 PRISMA 指南。PICO 特征为:患者(P)= 需要种植牙的下颌全口义齿患者;干预(I)= 在下颌义齿下植入 MDI;对照(C)= 在下颌义齿下植入 SDI;结果(O)= 比较 MDI 和 SDI 在支撑下颌义齿方面的稳定性。仅纳入了 RCT。使用 Cochrane RoB 工具评估偏倚风险(RoB):结果:共纳入了五项 RCT。参与研究的人数在 45 到 120 名佩戴下颌全口义齿的无牙患者之间。患者的平均年龄介于 59.5 ± 8.5 岁和 68.3 ± 8.5 岁之间。MDI 和 SDI 种植体数量分别为 22 至 152 个和 10 至 80 个。随访时间从一周到 12 个月不等。三项研究报告显示,使用 MDI 或 SDI 稳定下颌义齿后,所有患者的生活质量(QoL)都得到了改善。在一项研究中,MDI 和 SDI 在 1 年随访时的种植体周围软组织状况相当。两项研究报告显示,MDI 和 SDI 的种植体存活率分别为 89% 至 98% 和 99% 至 100%。所有临床试验的RoB均较低:结论:在寻求下颌覆盖义齿最佳固位时,微型牙种植体是传统标准直径种植体的可行替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Oral health & preventive dentistry
Oral health & preventive dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinicians, general practitioners, teachers, researchers, and public health administrators will find this journal an indispensable source of essential, timely information about scientific progress in the fields of oral health and the prevention of caries, periodontal diseases, oral mucosal diseases, and dental trauma. Central topics, including oral hygiene, oral epidemiology, oral health promotion, and public health issues, are covered in peer-reviewed articles such as clinical and basic science research reports; reviews; invited focus articles, commentaries, and guest editorials; and symposium, workshop, and conference proceedings.
期刊最新文献
Self-monitoring of Oral Health Using Smartphone Selfie Powered by Artificial Intelligence: Implications for Preventive Dentistry. Does Non-surgical Periodontal Therapy With Adjunct Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy Help Reduce Periodontal Inflammation and Haemoglobin A1c Levels in Patients With Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Effect of Active Oxygen Fluid (Blue®m) as a Root Canal Irrigant Against Enterococcus Faecalis. Evaluation of Colour Changes in Nanocomposite-Based Bulk-Fill and Universal Composite Using Different Polishing Systems. The Mechanisms and Application Value of Postbiotics in Caries Prevention and Management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1