• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

与牙种植体传统负载相比,即刻负载的年度失败率和边缘骨水平变化。文献系统评价与荟萃分析。

Annual failure rates and marginal bone-level changes of immediate compared to conventional loading of dental implants. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Engelhardt Sebastian, Papacosta Petros, Rathe Florian, Özen Jülide, Jansen John A, Junker Rüdiger

机构信息

Section Parodontologie, C1 Centre Médico-Dentaire, Geneva, Switzerland.

出版信息

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jun;26(6):671-87. doi: 10.1111/clr.12363. Epub 2014 Mar 15.

DOI:10.1111/clr.12363
PMID:24628882
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Immediate loading of dental implants appears to be a successful option. Questions still remain whether annual failure rates (AFRs) as well as annual marginal bone-level changes are comparable with conventionally loaded implants.

HYPOTHESIS

Immediately loaded implants (≤24 h after implantation) do not show different annual survival rates or peri-implant bone-level changes as compared to conventionally loaded implants (≥3 months after implantation).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search in the National Library of Medicine and in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed for articles published up to November 2013. Only publications in English were considered. Additionally, the bibliographies of the full-text papers were searched. Primary outcome variable was percentage AFR; secondary outcome variable was annual radiographic bone-level change.

RESULTS

Electronic search yielded 154 full-text articles; ten randomized controlled clinical trials were eventually meta-analyzed. Annual failure rates were 2.3% and 3.4% for conventionally and immediately loaded implants, respectively. No difference in implant failure rates was found (RR: 0.82). Regarding marginal bone-level changes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) between immediate and conventional loading amounted to 0.02 mm at 1 year (P > 0.05), to 0.08 mm at 2 years (P > 0.05), -0.10 mm at 3 years (P > 0.05) and -0.3 mm at 5 years (P < 0.05). The total WMD for the combined follow-up was 0.01 mm (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

No clinically relevant differences regarding annual failure rates or radiographic bone-level changes between conventionally and immediately loaded implants can be found for up to 5 years of follow-up.

摘要

背景

牙种植体即刻负重似乎是一种成功的选择。然而,其年失败率(AFR)以及每年边缘骨水平变化是否与传统负重种植体相当,仍存在疑问。

假设

与传统负重种植体(种植后≥3个月)相比,即刻负重种植体(种植后≤24小时)的年生存率或种植体周围骨水平变化并无差异。

材料与方法

对美国国立医学图书馆及考克兰系统评价数据库中截至2013年11月发表的文章进行电子检索。仅纳入英文出版物。此外,还检索了全文论文的参考文献。主要结局变量为AFR百分比;次要结局变量为每年影像学骨水平变化。

结果

电子检索得到154篇全文文章;最终对10项随机对照临床试验进行了荟萃分析。传统负重和即刻负重种植体的年失败率分别为2.3%和3.4%。未发现种植体失败率存在差异(RR:0.82)。关于边缘骨水平变化,即刻负重与传统负重之间的加权平均差(WMD)在1年时为0.02mm(P>0.05),2年时为0.08mm(P>0.05),3年时为-0.10mm(P>0.05),5年时为-0.3mm(P<0.05)。联合随访的总WMD为0.01mm(P>0.05)。

结论

在长达5年的随访中,未发现传统负重和即刻负重种植体在年失败率或影像学骨水平变化方面存在临床相关差异。

相似文献

1
Annual failure rates and marginal bone-level changes of immediate compared to conventional loading of dental implants. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.与牙种植体传统负载相比,即刻负载的年度失败率和边缘骨水平变化。文献系统评价与荟萃分析。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jun;26(6):671-87. doi: 10.1111/clr.12363. Epub 2014 Mar 15.
2
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants.缺失牙修复干预措施:牙种植体不同的加载时间。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 28;2013(3):CD003878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003878.pub5.
3
Effectiveness of sinus lift procedures for dental implant rehabilitation: a Cochrane systematic review.上颌窦提升术用于牙种植修复的有效性:一项Cochrane系统评价
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2010 Spring;3(1):7-26.
4
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants.缺失牙修复干预措施:牙种植体不同的加载时间
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21(1):CD003878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003878.pub4.
5
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants.缺失牙修复干预措施:牙种植体不同的负载时间。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18(2):CD003878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003878.pub3.
6
Timing of implant placement after tooth extraction: immediate, immediate-delayed or delayed implants? A Cochrane systematic review.拔牙后种植体植入时机:即刻种植、即刻延期种植还是延期种植?一项Cochrane系统评价
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2010 Autumn;3(3):189-205.
7
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: dental implants in fresh extraction sockets (immediate, immediate-delayed and delayed implants).缺失牙修复干预措施:新鲜拔牙窝内的牙种植体(即刻种植、即刻延期种植和延期种植)
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Sep 8;2010(9):CD005968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005968.pub3.
8
Soft and Hard Tissue Changes Following Immediate Placement or Immediate Restoration of Single-Tooth Implants in the Esthetic Zone: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.美学区单颗牙种植体即刻植入或即刻修复后的软硬组织变化:一项系统评价与Meta分析
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016 Nov/Dec;31(6):1327-1340. doi: 10.11607/jomi.4668.
9
The impact of immediately placed and restored single-tooth implants on hard and soft tissues in the anterior maxilla.即刻植入并修复的单颗上颌前牙种植体对软硬组织的影响。
Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016;9 Suppl 1:S89-106.
10
Effect of the timing of restoration on implant marginal bone loss: a systematic review.修复时机对种植体边缘骨丧失的影响:系统评价。
J Periodontol. 2013 Feb;84(2):159-69. doi: 10.1902/jop.2012.120099. Epub 2012 Apr 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Immediate and conventional loading of anterior dental implants: Aesthetic considerations and outcomes.前牙种植体的即刻负重与传统负重:美学考量与效果
Bioinformation. 2024 Sep 30;20(9):980-985. doi: 10.6026/973206300200980. eCollection 2024.
2
The All-on-four concept for fixed full-arch rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla and mandible: a longitudinal study in Japanese patients with 3-17-year follow-up and analysis of risk factors for survival rate.All-on-four 理念用于无牙颌上下颌的固定全口修复:一项对日本患者进行的长达 3-17 年随访的纵向研究,并对生存率的影响因素进行分析。
Int J Implant Dent. 2023 Nov 8;9(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s40729-023-00511-0.
3
An antibacterial chitosan-based hydrogel as a potential degradable bio-scaffold for alveolar ridge preservation.
一种基于壳聚糖的抗菌水凝胶作为用于牙槽嵴保存的潜在可降解生物支架。
RSC Adv. 2022 Nov 11;12(50):32219-32229. doi: 10.1039/d2ra05151f. eCollection 2022 Nov 9.
4
Immediate loading of short implants: A systematic review.短种植体即刻负重:一项系统评价
J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. 2021 Mar 6;13(1):15-21. doi: 10.34172/japid.2021.002. eCollection 2021.
5
Five-Year Prospective Study on Implant Failure and Marginal Bone Remodeling Expected Using Bone Level Implants with Sandblasted/Acid-Etched Surface and Conical Connection.关于使用喷砂/酸蚀表面及锥形连接的骨水平种植体的种植失败和边缘骨重塑的五年前瞻性研究
Eur J Dent. 2022 Oct;16(4):787-795. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1739439. Epub 2022 Jan 6.
6
Does immediate loading of a single implant in the healed anterior maxillary ridge improve the aesthetic outcome compared to conventional loading?与传统负重相比,在上颌前部愈合牙槽嵴中对单个种植体进行即刻负重是否能改善美学效果?
BDJ Open. 2021 Aug 12;7(1):30. doi: 10.1038/s41405-021-00083-4.
7
Methodological quality and risk of bias of systematic reviews about loading time of multiple dental implants in totally or partially edentulous patients: An umbrella systematic review.关于全口或部分无牙患者多颗牙种植体植入时间的系统评价的方法学质量和偏倚风险:一项伞形系统评价
Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2020 Nov;56(1):135-146. doi: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2020.09.004. Epub 2020 Oct 14.
8
Comparative Study Between an Immediate Loading Protocol Using the Digital Workflow and a Conventional Protocol for Dental Implant Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.使用数字化工作流程的即刻加载方案与传统方案在牙种植治疗中的对比研究:一项随机临床试验
J Clin Med. 2019 May 7;8(5):622. doi: 10.3390/jcm8050622.
9
[Recent research advances on alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction].[拔牙后牙槽嵴保存的近期研究进展]
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2019 Feb 1;37(1):97-101. doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2019.01.019.
10
Comparison of immediate and conventional loading protocols with respect to marginal bone loss around implants supporting mandibular overdentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.关于支持下颌覆盖义齿的种植体周围边缘骨丢失的即刻加载与传统加载方案的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2019 Nov;55(1):20-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2018.09.005. Epub 2018 Oct 24.