Suppr超能文献

短种植体与标准种植体在窦腔提升部位的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Short versus standard implants at sinus augmented sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Faculty of Dentistry, University of Granada, Colegio Máximo de Cartijo S/N, 18071, Granada, Spain.

出版信息

Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Nov;26(11):6681-6698. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04628-1. Epub 2022 Sep 7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Short implants are proposed as a less invasive alternative with fewer complications than standard implants in combination with sinus lift. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to state the efficacy of placing short implants (≤ 6 mm) compared to standard-length implants (≥ 8 mm) performing sinus lift techniques in patients with edentulous posterior atrophic jaws. Efficacy will be evaluated through analyzing implant survival (IS) and maintenance of peri-implant bone (MBL).

METHODS

Screening process was done using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE by PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Oral Health, and Web of Science (WOS). The articles included were randomized controlled trials. Risk of bias was evaluated according to The Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Weighted means were calculated. Heterogeneity was determined using Higgins (I). A random-effects model was applied. Secondary outcomes such as surgical time, patient satisfaction, mucositis and peri-implantitis, pain, and swelling were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (597 patients and 901 implants) were evaluated. IS was 1.02 risk ratio, ranging from 1.00 to 1.05 (CI 95%) (p = 0.09), suggesting that IS was similar when both techniques were used. MBL was higher in patients with standard-length implants plus sinus lift elevation (p = 0.03). MBL was 0.11 (0.01-0.20) mm (p = 0.03) and 0.23 (0.07-0.39) mm (p = 0.005) before and after 1 year of follow-up, respectively, indicating that the marginal bone loss is greater for standard-length implants.

DISCUSSION

Within the limitations of the present study, as relatively small sample size, short dental implants can be used as an alternative to standard-length implants plus sinus elevation in cases of atrophic posterior maxilla. Higher MBL was observed in the groups where standard-length implants were used, but implant survival was similar in both groups. Moreover, with short implants, it was observed a reduced postoperative discomfort, minimal invasiveness, shorter treatment time, and reduced costs.

CLINICAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The low MBL promoted by short implants does contribute to a paradigm shift from sinus grafting with long implants to short implants. Further high-quality long-term studies are required to confirm these findings.

摘要

背景

短种植体被认为是一种侵袭性较小的替代方法,与标准长度种植体(≥8mm)结合鼻窦提升术相比,并发症更少。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估在无牙后牙槽骨萎缩的患者中,使用短种植体(≤6mm)与标准长度种植体(≥8mm)进行鼻窦提升术的疗效。通过分析种植体存活率(IS)和种植体周围骨维持(MBL)来评估疗效。

方法

使用美国国立医学图书馆(MEDLINE by PubMed)、EMBASE、Cochrane 口腔健康和 Web of Science(WOS)进行筛选过程。纳入的文章为随机对照试验。根据 Cochrane 协作组的工具评估偏倚风险。计算加权平均值。使用 Higgins(I)确定异质性。应用随机效应模型。分析了手术时间、患者满意度、黏膜炎和种植体周围炎、疼痛和肿胀等次要结局。

结果

评估了 14 项研究(597 名患者和 901 个种植体)。IS 的风险比为 1.02,范围为 1.00 至 1.05(95%CI)(p=0.09),这表明两种技术的 IS 相似。标准长度种植体加鼻窦提升术患者的 MBL 更高(p=0.03)。MBL 在 1 年随访前后分别为 0.11(0.01-0.20)mm(p=0.03)和 0.23(0.07-0.39)mm,表明标准长度种植体的边缘骨损失更大。

讨论

在本研究的限制范围内,由于样本量相对较小,短种植体可作为后上颌骨萎缩患者标准长度种植体加鼻窦提升术的替代方法。在使用标准长度种植体的组中观察到更高的 MBL,但两组的种植体存活率相似。此外,使用短种植体可减少术后不适、微创性、缩短治疗时间和降低成本。

临床相关性

短种植体促进的低 MBL 确实有助于从长种植体的鼻窦移植到短种植体的范式转变。需要进一步进行高质量的长期研究来证实这些发现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/031e/9643210/e17322d8856a/784_2022_4628_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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