Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B, Kämmerer P W, Grötz K A
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany,
Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Apr;18(3):687-98. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1134-9. Epub 2013 Nov 24.
The aim of this comprehensive literature review is to provide recommendations and guidelines for dental implant therapy in patients with a history of radiation in the head and neck region. For the first time, a meta-analysis comparing the implant survival in irradiated and non-irradiated patients was performed.
An extensive electronic search in the electronic databases of the National Library of Medicine was conducted for articles published between January 1990 and January 2013 to identify literature presenting survival data on the topic of dental implants in patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. For meta-analysis, only studies with a mean follow-up of at least 5 years were included.
After screening 529 abstracts from the electronic database, we included 31 studies in qualitative and 8 in quantitative synthesis. The mean implant survival rate of all examined studies was 83 % (range, 34-100 %). Meta-analysis of the current literature (2007-2013) revealed no statistically significant difference in implant survival between non-irradiated native bone and irradiated native bone (odds ratio [OR], 1.44; confidence interval [CI], 0.67-3.1). In contrast, meta-analysis of the literature of the years 1990-2006 showed a significant difference in implant survival between non-irradiated and irradiated patients ([OR], 2.12; [CI], 1.69-2.65) with a higher implant survival in the non-irradiated bone. Meta-analysis of the implant survival regarding bone origin indicated a statistically significant higher implant survival in the irradiated native bone compared to the irradiated grafted bone ([OR], 1.82; [CI], 1.14-2.90).
Within the limits of this meta-analytic approach to the literature, this study describes for the first time a comparable implant survival in non-irradiated and irradiated native bone in the current literature. Grafted bone combined with radiotherapy was identified as a negative prognostic factor on implant survival.
The evolution of implant hardware and improvement of treatment strategies during the last years have affirmed dental implant-supported concepts as a valuable treatment option for patients with a history of radiation in the head and neck region.
本全面文献综述的目的是为有头颈部放疗史的患者提供牙种植治疗的建议和指南。首次进行了一项荟萃分析,比较接受放疗和未接受放疗患者的种植体存活率。
在国立医学图书馆的电子数据库中进行广泛的电子检索,查找1990年1月至2013年1月发表的文章,以确定有关头颈部癌放疗患者牙种植体存活率数据的文献。根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目声明进行综述和荟萃分析。对于荟萃分析,仅纳入平均随访至少5年的研究。
从电子数据库中筛选出529篇摘要后,我们纳入了31项定性研究和8项定量综合研究。所有纳入研究的种植体平均存活率为83%(范围为34%-100%)。对当前文献(2007 - 2013年)的荟萃分析显示,未接受放疗的天然骨和接受放疗的天然骨之间的种植体存活率无统计学显著差异(优势比[OR]为1.44;置信区间[CI]为0.67 - 3.1)。相比之下,对1990 - 2006年文献的荟萃分析显示,未接受放疗和接受放疗的患者之间的种植体存活率存在显著差异([OR]为2.12;[CI]为1.69 - 2.65),未接受放疗的骨中的种植体存活率更高。关于骨来源的种植体存活率的荟萃分析表明,与接受放疗的移植骨相比,接受放疗的天然骨中的种植体存活率在统计学上显著更高([OR]为1.82;[CI]为1.14 - 2.90)。
在本对文献的荟萃分析方法的局限性内,本研究首次描述了当前文献中未接受放疗和接受放疗的天然骨中具有可比的种植体存活率。移植骨联合放疗被确定为种植体存活率的负面预后因素。
在过去几年中,种植体硬件的发展和治疗策略的改进已肯定了牙种植体支持的概念是有头颈部放疗史患者的一种有价值的治疗选择。