de Medeiros F C F L, Kudo G A H, Leme B G, Saraiva P P, Verri F R, Honório H M, Pellizzer E P, Santiago Junior J F
Pró-Reitoria de Pesquisa e Pós-graduação (PRPPG), Universidade do Sagrado Coração, Bauru, SP, Brazil.
Dental School of Araçatuba, UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Apr;47(4):480-491. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.05.021. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
There is currently no consensus regarding the survival rate of osseointegrated implants in patients with osteoporosis. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the survival rate of implants in such patients. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and SciELO databases were used to identify articles published up to September 2016. The systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA/PICO requirements and the risk of bias was assessed (Australian National Health and Medical Research Council scale). The relative risk (RR) of implant failure and mean marginal bone loss were analyzed within a 95% confidence interval (CI). Fifteen studies involving 8859 patients and 29,798 implants were included. The main outcome of the meta-analysis indicated that there was no difference in implant survival rate between patients with and without osteoporosis, either at the implant level (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.93-2.08; P=0.11) or at the patient level (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.50-1.89; P=0.94). However, the meta-analysis for the secondary outcome revealed a significant difference in marginal bone loss around implants between patients with and without osteoporosis (0.18mm, 95% CI 0.05-0.30, P=0.005). Data heterogeneity was low. An increase in peri-implant bone loss was observed in the osteoporosis group. Randomized and controlled clinical studies should be conducted to analyze possible biases.
目前,关于骨质疏松症患者中骨整合植入物的存活率尚无共识。我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估此类患者中植入物的存活率。使用PubMed/MEDLINE、科学网、Cochrane图书馆和SciELO数据库来识别截至2016年9月发表的文章。该系统评价按照PRISMA/PICO要求进行,并评估了偏倚风险(澳大利亚国家卫生与医学研究委员会量表)。在95%置信区间(CI)内分析植入物失败的相对风险(RR)和平均边缘骨丢失。纳入了15项涉及8859名患者和29798颗植入物的研究。荟萃分析的主要结果表明,无论在植入物水平(RR 1.39,95%CI 0.93 - 2.08;P = 0.11)还是患者水平(RR 0.98,95%CI 0.50 - 1.89;P = 0.94),有骨质疏松症和无骨质疏松症的患者之间植入物存活率均无差异。然而,次要结果的荟萃分析显示,有骨质疏松症和无骨质疏松症的患者之间植入物周围边缘骨丢失存在显著差异(0.18mm,95%CI 0.05 - 0.30,P = 0.005)。数据异质性较低。在骨质疏松症组中观察到种植体周围骨丢失增加。应进行随机对照临床研究以分析可能的偏倚。