Suppr超能文献

比较短种植体和标准种植体在边缘骨水平变化方面的差异:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparing short dental implant and standard dental implant in terms of marginal bone level changes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Dental Implant Research Center, Dental Faculty, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

Department of Health Sciences Education Development, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Aug;21(4):796-812. doi: 10.1111/cid.12774. Epub 2019 May 1.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare short implants (SH; 4-8 mm) to standard implants (ST; longer than 8 mm) in edentulous jaws, evaluating pri-implant marginal bone levels (MBLs) changes, implant failures (IFs), complications, and prosthesis failures (PFs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted through the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov to locate all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SH to ST. Meta-analysis procedures were performed on the weighted mean difference (WMD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) of MBLs using Stata.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles were included in this review. The WMD of MBLs when comparing SH to ST in both jaws up to 1-year follow-up was statistically significant preferring SH (WMD: -0.09 [CI: -0.12, -0.06], I : 67.0%). The efficacy of SH vs ST on SMD of MBLs was moderate (SMD: -0.43 [CI: -0.57, -0.28], I : 55.7%). There were no significant differences in IF (RR: 0.75 [0.44,1.27]) and PF (RR: 0.58 (0.22,1.581), and significantly higher biological complications (RR: 0.25 [0.15, 0.40]) for SH was observed compared to the ST in both jaws up to 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

SH and ST implants showed the comparable outcomes except biological complication preferring SH. Future systematic review and meta-analysis with longer and larger RCTs are required to confirm the present outcomes.

摘要

目的

比较无牙颌中短种植体(SH;4-8mm)与标准种植体(ST;长于 8mm),评估种植体边缘骨水平(MBL)变化、种植体失败(IF)、并发症和修复体失败(PF)。

材料与方法

通过 PubMed、Web of Science、EMBASE、Scopus、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 ClinicalTrials.gov 电子检索,检索比较 SH 与 ST 的随机对照试验(RCT)。采用 Stata 对 MBL 的加权均数差(WMD)和标准化均数差(SMD)进行荟萃分析。

结果

本综述共纳入 23 篇文章。在 1 年随访时,SH 与 ST 相比,在上下颌的 MBL 的 WMD 差异具有统计学意义,更倾向于 SH(WMD:-0.09 [CI:-0.12,-0.06],I²:67.0%)。SH 与 ST 相比,MBL 的 SMD 疗效为中度(SMD:-0.43 [CI:-0.57,-0.28],I²:55.7%)。在 1 年随访时,SH 与 ST 在 IF(RR:0.75 [0.44,1.27])和 PF(RR:0.58 [0.22,1.581])方面无显著差异,且在上下颌的生物并发症(RR:0.25 [0.15,0.40])显著更高。

结论

SH 和 ST 种植体的结果相当,除了生物并发症方面,SH 更具优势。需要进行更长时间、更大规模的 RCT 来进一步证实本研究结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验