Patzelt Sebastian B M, Bahat Oded, Reynolds Mark A, Strub Joerg R
Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University Hospital, Freiburg, Germany; Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Dec;16(6):836-55. doi: 10.1111/cid.12068. Epub 2013 Apr 5.
The study aims to evaluate the all-on-four treatment concept with regard to survival rates (SRs) of oral implants, applied fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and temporal changes in proximal bone levels.
A systematic review of publications in English and German was performed using the electronic bibliographic database MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Google. Hand searches were conducted of the bibliographies of related journals and systematic reviews. The authors performed evaluations of articles independently, as well as data extraction and quality assessment. Data were submitted the weighted least-squared analysis.
Thirteen (487 initially identified) papers met inclusion criteria. A number of 4,804 implants were initially placed, of which 74 failed, with a majority of failures (74%) within the first 12 months. A total of 1,201 prostheses were incorporated within 48 hours after the surgery. The major prosthetic complication was the fracture of the all-acrylic FDP. The mean cumulative SR/SR ± (standard deviation) (36 months) of implants and prostheses were 99.0 ± 1.0% and 99.9 ± 0.3%, respectively. The averaged bone loss was 1.3 ± 0.4 mm (36 months). No statistically significant differences were found in outcome measures, when comparing maxillary versus mandibular arches and axially versus tilted placed implants.
The available data provide promising short-term results for the all-on-four treatment approach; however, current evidence is limited by the quality of available studies and the paucity of data on long-term clinical outcomes of 5 years or greater. In terms of an evidence-based dentistry, the authors recommend further studies designed as randomized controlled clinical trials and reported according to the CONSORT statement.
本研究旨在评估全口四颗种植体治疗理念在口腔种植体生存率、应用的固定义齿(FDP)以及近中骨水平的时间变化方面的情况。
使用电子文献数据库MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆和谷歌对英文和德文出版物进行系统综述。对手检相关期刊的参考文献和系统综述进行手工检索。作者独立进行文章评估、数据提取和质量评估。数据采用加权最小二乘法分析。
13篇(最初识别出487篇)论文符合纳入标准。最初共植入4804颗种植体,其中74颗失败,大多数失败(74%)发生在最初的12个月内。术后48小时内共植入1201副义齿。主要的修复并发症是全丙烯酸FDP的骨折。种植体和义齿的平均累积生存率/生存率±(标准差)(36个月)分别为99.0±1.0%和99.9±0.3%。平均骨吸收为1.3±0.4毫米(36个月)。在上颌与下颌牙弓以及轴向种植体与倾斜种植体之间比较时,在结果指标上未发现统计学显著差异。
现有数据为全口四颗种植体治疗方法提供了有前景的短期结果;然而,目前的证据受到现有研究质量以及5年或更长时间长期临床结果数据匮乏的限制。就循证牙科而言,作者建议开展进一步的随机对照临床试验研究,并按照CONSORT声明进行报告。