Howe Mark-Steven
Broadway Dental Care, Broadway, Worcestershire, The School of Dentistry, University of Liverpool, Pembroke Place, Liverpool and the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Evid Based Dent. 2017 Mar;18(1):8-10. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401216.
Data sourcesMedline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register databases and a manual search of the Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Periodontology and the International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry from January 2014 to February 2015.Study selectionProspective, retrospective, randomised or not, case-controlled or case series trials showing the incidence or recurrence of peri-implant disease plus or minus PIMT over more than six months.Data extraction and synthesisThree reviewers independently selected studies and abstracted data with two reviewers assessing study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A multivariate binomial regression was used to examine the data.ResultsThirteen studies were included with ten contributing to the meta-analysis. The average quality assessment score (NOS) was 5.3 out of a possible nine, only one paper achieved eight. At patient level mucositis ranged from 18.5-74.2% and peri-implantitis from 8-28%, with significant effects being seen for treatment (z= -14.36, p<0.001). Mucositis was affected by history of periodontitis and mean PIMT at implant and patient levels, respectively. For peri-implantitis there were also significant effects of treatment (z = -16.63, p<0.001). Increased peri-implantitis was observed for patients with a history of periodontal disease. (z=3.76, p<0.001). Implants under PIMT have 0.958 the incident event compared to those with no PIMT.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of the present systematic review it can be concluded that implant therapy must not be limited to placement and restoration of dental implants, but to the implementation of PIMT to potentially prevent biological complications and heighten the long-term success rate. Although it must be tailored to a patients risk profiling, our findings suggest reason to claim a minimum recall PIMT interval of five to six months. Additionally, it must be stressed that even in the establishment of PIMT, biological complications might occur. Hence, patient-, clinical-, and implant-related factors must be thoroughly explored.
数据来源
检索了Medline(PubMed)、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库和Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册数据库,并对2014年1月至2015年2月期间的《牙科研究杂志》《临床牙周病学杂志》《牙周病学杂志》和《国际牙周病与修复牙科杂志》进行了手工检索。
研究选择
前瞻性、回顾性、随机或非随机、病例对照或病例系列试验,显示种植体周围疾病的发病率或复发率以及有无种植体周围黏膜下骨炎超过6个月的情况。
数据提取与综合
三位评审员独立选择研究并提取数据,两位评审员使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)评估研究质量。采用多变量二项式回归分析数据。
结果
纳入了13项研究,其中10项纳入荟萃分析。平均质量评估得分(NOS)在可能的9分中为5.3分,只有一篇论文达到8分。在患者层面,黏膜炎发生率为18.5%-74.2%,种植体周围炎为8%-28%,治疗有显著效果(z=-14.36,p<0.001)。黏膜炎分别受牙周炎病史以及种植体和患者层面的平均种植体周围黏膜下骨炎的影响。对于种植体周围炎,治疗也有显著效果(z=-16.63,p<0.001)。有牙周病病史的患者种植体周围炎发生率增加(z=3.76,p<0.001)。有种植体周围黏膜下骨炎的种植体与无种植体周围黏膜下骨炎的种植体相比,发生事件的概率为0.958。
结论
在本系统评价的局限性内,可以得出结论,种植治疗不应局限于牙种植体的植入和修复,还应实施种植体周围黏膜下骨炎治疗以潜在预防生物并发症并提高长期成功率。尽管必须根据患者的风险特征进行调整,但我们的研究结果表明有理由主张至少每五到六个月进行一次种植体周围黏膜下骨炎复诊。此外,必须强调的是,即使在实施种植体周围黏膜下骨炎治疗时,也可能发生生物并发症。因此,必须全面探究患者、临床和种植相关因素。