Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Valparaiso, Valparaíso, Chile.
Oral Rehabilitation Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Valparaiso, Valparaíso, Chile.
J Prosthodont Res. 2024 Apr 8;68(2):206-214. doi: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00220. Epub 2023 Aug 31.
The present study aimed to identify, through a critical review of the literature, the success factors associated with the splinting of fixed prostheses on adjacent implants of the posterior sectors in partially edentulous patients compared with those not splinted.
A MEDLINE strategy was implemented based on a research question to systematically search and extract information from databases (PubMed and Scopus) using MeSH terms/keywords identified for each domain. Systematic reviews, clinical and in vitro studies were selected and classified according to eligibility criteria based on the research question and level of evidence using the PRISMA flowchart.
A total of 32 studies were selected for data extraction and analysis according to study design (three systematic reviews, 14 clinical studies, and 15 in vitro studies). Overall, the studies found no significant difference in the association between the survival rate and prosthesis type. In clinical studies, there have been no differences in marginal bone loss between splinted and non-splinted prostheses, and the influence of peri-implant status and restorative materials has been poorly evaluated. The distribution of stress and loads determined in the in vitro studies showed results that could favor splinted prostheses; however, are generally associated with implant design.
The need for splinted or non-splinted adjacent implant-supported prostheses remains controversial. The reviewed evidence indicates that factors such as implant size and its relationship with coronal height could be important in decision-making.
本研究旨在通过对文献进行批判性回顾，确定在后牙区部分缺牙患者中，与未固定桥修复的种植体相比，固定修复体桥接固定桥的成功因素。
采用 MEDLINE 策略，根据研究问题，使用为每个领域确定的 MeSH 术语/关键词，从数据库（PubMed 和 Scopus）中系统地搜索和提取信息。根据研究问题和证据水平，根据入选标准，选择并分类了系统评价、临床和体外研究。
根据研究设计（三项系统评价、十四项临床研究和十五项体外研究），共选择了 32 项研究进行数据提取和分析。总体而言，研究发现生存率和修复体类型之间没有显著关联。在临床研究中，桥接和非桥接修复体之间的边缘骨丧失没有差异，种植体周围状况和修复材料的影响评估不足。体外研究中确定的应力和负荷分布显示结果可能有利于桥接修复体；然而，通常与植入物设计有关。
对于桥接或非桥接相邻种植体支持的修复体的需求仍存在争议。回顾的证据表明，种植体大小及其与冠部高度的关系等因素在决策中可能很重要。
