Emami Elham, Heydecke Guido, Rompré Pierre H, de Grandmont Pierre, Feine Jocelyne S
Départment de Dentisterie et de Restauration, Faculté de Médecine Dentaire, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Jun;20(6):533-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01693.x.
The aim of this study was to examine systematically the data published on the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures from the patient's perspective.
Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and The Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database were searched and complemented by hand searching. All randomized-controlled trials published in English or French up to April 2007 were included, in which conventional dentures and mandibular implant overdentures in adult edentulous individuals were compared. The outcomes of interest were patient satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life. Random effects models were used to pool the effect sizes (ES) of all included studies.
Ten publications of seven randomized-controlled trials were identified and eight were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with mandibular conventional dentures, implant overdentures were rated to be more satisfactory at a clinically relevant level [pooled ES 0.80, z=3.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36-1.24, P=0.0004], but a statistical heterogeneity was found (chi(2)=31.63, df=5, P<0.00001, I(2)=84%). The pooled ES for oral health quality of life was -0.41 (z=1.31, 95% CI, -1.02 to 0.20; P=0.19, chi(2)=11.53, df=2, P<0.003, I(2)=83%). There was a lack of evidence to show the impact of mandibular implant overdenture on perceived general health.
Our findings suggest that, although mandibular implant-retained overdentures may be more satisfying for edentulous patients than new conventional dentures, the magnitude of the effect is still uncertain. There is a need for additional evidence including cost-effectiveness analyses on the impact of mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures.
本研究旨在从患者角度系统审查已发表的关于下颌种植体支持覆盖义齿疗效的数据。
检索了Medline、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库和Cochrane系统评价数据库,并通过手工检索进行补充。纳入了截至2007年4月发表的所有英文或法文随机对照试验,其中比较了成年无牙患者的传统义齿和下颌种植覆盖义齿。感兴趣的结局是患者满意度、口腔及与总体健康相关的生活质量。采用随机效应模型汇总所有纳入研究的效应量(ES)。
共识别出7项随机对照试验的10篇出版物,其中8篇纳入荟萃分析。与下颌传统义齿相比,种植覆盖义齿在临床相关水平上被评为更令人满意[合并ES 0.80,z = 3.56,95%置信区间(CI)0.36 - 1.24,P = 0.0004],但发现存在统计学异质性(chi(2)=31.63,df = 5,P < 0.00001,I(2)=84%)。口腔健康生活质量的合并ES为 - 0.41(z = 1.31,95% CI, - 1.02至0.20;P = 0.19,chi(2)=11.53,df = 2,P < 0.003,I(2)=83%)。缺乏证据表明下颌种植覆盖义齿对感知的总体健康有影响。
我们的研究结果表明,虽然下颌种植体支持覆盖义齿对无牙患者可能比新的传统义齿更令人满意,但效果的大小仍不确定。需要更多证据,包括关于下颌种植覆盖义齿和传统义齿影响的成本效益分析。