Fiorillo Luca, Cicciù Marco, Tozum Tolga Fikret, Saccucci Matteo, Orlando Cristiano, Romano Giovanni Luca, D'Amico Cesare, Cervino Gabriele
Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, Messina University, 98100 Messina, Italy.
Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialties, Second University of Naples, 80100 Naples, Italy.
Materials (Basel). 2022 Mar 7;15(5):1979. doi: 10.3390/ma15051979.
In recent years, implantology has made significant progress, as it has now become a safe and predictable practice. The development of new geometries, primary and secondary, of new surfaces and alloys, has made this possible. The purpose of this review is to analyze the different alloys present on the market, such as that in zirconia, and evaluate their clinical differences with those most commonly used, such as those in grade IV titanium. The review, conducted on major scientific databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and MDPI yielded a startling number of 305 results. After the application of the filters and the evaluation of the results in the review, only 10 Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) were included. Multiple outcomes were considered, such as Marginal Bone Level (MBL), Bleeding on Probing (BoP), Survival Rate, Success Rate and parameters related to aesthetic and prosthetic factors. There are currently no statistically significant differences between the use of zirconia implants and titanium implants, neither for fixed prosthetic restorations nor for overdenture restorations. Only the cases reported complain about the rigidity and, therefore, the possibility of fracture of the zirconium. Certainly the continuous improvement in these materials will ensure that they could be used safely while maintaining their high aesthetic performance.
近年来,种植学取得了显著进展,如今已成为一种安全且可预测的实践。新的一级和二级几何形状、新表面及合金的开发使之成为可能。本综述的目的是分析市场上存在的不同合金,如氧化锆中的合金,并评估它们与最常用的合金(如四级钛中的合金)在临床上的差异。在Scopus、PubMed、Web of Science和MDPI等主要科学数据库上进行的综述产生了惊人的305条结果。在应用筛选器并评估综述中的结果后,仅纳入了10项随机临床试验(RCT)。考虑了多个结果,如边缘骨水平(MBL)、探诊出血(BoP)、生存率、成功率以及与美学和修复因素相关的参数。目前,对于固定修复体和覆盖义齿修复体,使用氧化锆种植体和钛种植体之间在统计学上没有显著差异。只有报告的病例抱怨氧化锆的刚性,以及因此存在的断裂可能性。当然,这些材料的不断改进将确保它们在保持高美学性能的同时能够安全使用。