Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2021 May 12;14(2):141-154.
To investigate the effect of laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments on clinical measures that may relate to improved implant success and survival.
This review was registered on the PROSPERO database and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Embase were screened for studies with at least 10 participants and followed up for at least 1 year, reporting on the following clinical outcomes: radiographic marginal bone level, peri-implant probing depth, soft tissue index and failure rates of implants with laser microtextured collars or laser microtextured abutments. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
After removal of duplicates, 86 articles were identified. A total of 25 articles were included after screening. Four were randomised controlled trials, two were non-randomised controlled trials, two were prospective studies, five were retrospective cohort studies and twelve had no control group. Most comparative studies reported that laser microtextured collar implants had less marginal bone loss and shallower peri-implant probing depth than machined collar implants. Only two studies had controls other than machined collar implants; in these, the use of laser microtextured collar implants was not observed to be significantly different. Three studies reported reduced marginal recession in laser microtextured collar implants when compared to machined collar controls. No difference in failure rate was observed between laser microtextured collar and machined collar implants. One study reported on peri-implant diseases and favoured laser microtextured collar implants. Three papers reported using laser microtextured abutments with no control, but no specific conclusions could be drawn.
Laser microtextured collar implants appear to reduce marginal bone loss and peri-implant probing depth when compared to machined collar implants. There is weak evidence to suggest that laser microtextured collar implants may also improve aesthetic outcomes and reduce incidence of disease. Research is required regarding laser microtextured abutments, and studies comparing laser microtexturing with alternative solutions are also lacking.
研究激光微纹理颈圈或激光微纹理基台对可能与提高种植体成功率和存活率相关的临床指标的影响。
本综述已在 PROSPERO 数据库中注册,并按照系统评价和荟萃分析报告的首选条目进行。通过 MEDLINE(通过 PubMed)和 Embase 对至少有 10 名参与者且随访时间至少 1 年的研究进行了筛选,报告了以下临床结果:放射影像学边缘骨水平、种植体探诊深度、软组织指数以及激光微纹理颈圈或激光微纹理基台种植体的失败率。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具或纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估研究质量。
去除重复项后,共识别出 86 篇文章。经过筛选,共纳入 25 篇文章。其中 4 篇为随机对照试验,2 篇为非随机对照试验,2 篇为前瞻性研究,5 篇为回顾性队列研究,12 篇无对照组。大多数比较研究报告称,激光微纹理颈圈种植体的边缘骨丧失较少,探诊深度较机械颈圈种植体浅。只有两项研究除了机械颈圈种植体之外还有对照;在这些研究中,激光微纹理颈圈种植体的使用并未显示出明显差异。三项研究报告称,与机械颈圈对照相比,激光微纹理颈圈种植体的边缘退缩减少。激光微纹理颈圈和机械颈圈种植体的失败率无差异。一项研究报告了种植体周围疾病,倾向于使用激光微纹理颈圈种植体。三篇论文报告了使用激光微纹理基台,无对照,但无法得出具体结论。
与机械颈圈种植体相比,激光微纹理颈圈种植体似乎可减少边缘骨丧失和种植体探诊深度。有弱证据表明,激光微纹理颈圈种植体还可能改善美学效果,降低疾病发生率。需要对激光微纹理基台进行研究,也缺乏对激光微纹理与替代解决方案进行比较的研究。