Abayov Pinny, Sarikov Rafael, Nazarenko Lisa-Marie, Babich Oren, Haimov Eliezer, Juodzbalys Gintaras
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Odontology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, KaunasLithuania.
Oral and maxillofacial rehabilitation department and the temporomandibular joint diseases unit, Rambam Medical Center, HaifaIsrael.
J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2024 Jun 30;15(2):e2. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2024.15202. eCollection 2024 Apr-Jun.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide detailed insights into the clinical performance of short and longer dental implants placed simultaneously with bone augmentation.
The search for literature was performed across MEDLINE (PubMed), ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library databases, adhering to specific selection criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 were considered for data collection. Primary outcomes were survival rate (SR), marginal bone loss (MBL) and complications. Clinical outcomes were as follows: bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), and implant stability quotient (ISQ). Quality and risk of bias assessment were evaluated by the Critical Appraisal Checklist tool for randomized controlled trials developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
A total of 14678 articles were screened, with 9 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 495 patients with 984 implants (491 short and 493 longer implants) showing a SR of 93.91% for the short implants and 91.83% for the longer implants. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant difference between short implants and longer implants simultaneously placed with alveolar bone augmentation in relation to MBL (-0.513 mm, 95% CI = -0.93 to -0.096; P = 0.02), and in PPD (-0.247, 95% CI = -0.515 to 0.022; P = 0.07).
When comparing the results of treatment with short and longer dental implants combined with alveolar bone augmentation, short implants showed better clinical results regarding the parameters of survival rate, marginal bone loss and complications.
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在深入了解与骨增量同时植入的短种植体和长种植体的临床性能。
在MEDLINE（PubMed）、ScienceDirect和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行文献检索，遵循特定的选择标准和系统评价与荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）指南。仅收集2014年至2024年期间发表的英文文章进行数据收集。主要结局指标为生存率（SR）、边缘骨吸收（MBL）和并发症。临床结局指标如下：探诊出血（BOP）、牙周袋深度（PPD）和种植体稳定性商数（ISQ）。采用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所开发的随机对照试验关键评价清单工具评估质量和偏倚风险。
共筛选出14678篇文章，其中9篇符合纳入标准并用于本系统评价和荟萃分析。共有495例患者植入984枚种植体（491枚短种植体和493枚长种植体），短种植体的生存率为93.91%，长种植体的生存率为91.83%。荟萃分析显示，与牙槽骨增量同时植入的短种植体和长种植体在MBL方面存在统计学显著差异（-0.513mm，95%CI=-0.93至-0.096；P=0.02），在PPD方面也存在差异（-0.247，95%CI=-0.515至0.022；P=0.07）。
在比较短种植体和长种植体联合牙槽骨增量治疗的结果时，短种植体在生存率、边缘骨吸收和并发症参数方面显示出更好的临床效果。
