Cruz Ronaldo Silva, Lemos Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo, Oliveira Hiskell Francine Fernandes, de Souza Batista Victor Eduardo, Pellizzer Eduardo Piza, Verri Fellippo Ramos
1 Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Aracatuba Dental School, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista, Aracatuba Dental School, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
2 Department of Prosthodontics, Presidente Prudente Dental School, University of Western São Paulo - UNOESTE, Presidente Prudente, Brazil.
J Oral Implantol. 2018 Aug;44(4):305-312. doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-17-00233. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
The aim of this study was to compare the values of bone-implant contact (BIC) and removal torque (RTQ) reported in different animal studies for titanium-zirconium (TiZr) and titanium (Ti) dental implants. This review has been registered at PROSPERO under number CRD42016047745. We undertook an electronic search for data published up until November 2017 using the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library databases. Eligibility criteria included in vivo studies, comparisons between Ti and TiZr implants in the same study, and studies published in English that evaluated BIC and RTQ. After inclusion criteria, 8 studies were assessed for eligibility. Of the 8 studies, 7 analyzed BIC outcome and 3 analyzed RTQ outcome. Among such studies, 6 studies were considered for meta-analysis of quantitative for BIC and 2 studies for RTQ. There was no significant difference for BIC analysis ( P = .89; random ration [RR]: -0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.14 to 2.72). The heterogeneity of the primary outcome studies was considered low (7.19; P = .21; I : 30%). However, the RTQ analysis showed different results favoring the TiZr dental implants ( P = .001; RR: 23.62; 95%CI: 9.15 to 38.10). Low heterogeneity was observed for RTQ (χ: 1.25; P = .26; I : 20%). Within the limitations of this study, there was no difference between TiZr and Ti alloys implants in terms of BIC. However, TiZr implants had higher RTQ than Ti alloys.
本研究的目的是比较不同动物研究中报道的钛锆（TiZr）和钛（Ti）牙科种植体的骨-种植体接触（BIC）值和去除扭矩（RTQ）值。本综述已在PROSPERO注册，注册号为CRD42016047745。我们使用PubMed/Medline、Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库对截至2017年11月发表的数据进行了电子检索。纳入标准包括体内研究、同一研究中Ti和TiZr种植体的比较，以及以英文发表的评估BIC和RTQ的研究。根据纳入标准，对8项研究进行了资格评估。在这8项研究中，7项分析了BIC结果，3项分析了RTQ结果。在这些研究中，6项研究被纳入BIC定量荟萃分析，2项研究被纳入RTQ定量荟萃分析。BIC分析无显著差异（P = 0.89；随机比率[RR]：-0.21；95%置信区间[CI]：-3.14至2.72）。主要结局研究的异质性被认为较低（7.19；P = 0.21；I²：30%）。然而，RTQ分析显示出不同的结果，支持TiZr牙科种植体（P = 0.001；RR：23.62；95%CI：9.15至38.10）。RTQ的异质性较低（χ²：1.25；P = 0.26；I²：20%）。在本研究的局限性内，TiZr和Ti合金种植体在BIC方面没有差异。然而，TiZr种植体的RTQ高于Ti合金种植体。
