Koyama Ryo, Shiratsuchi Hiroshi, Hasuike Akira, Ohyama Tetsuo, Tamagawa Takaaki, Furukawa Akihiko, Namaki Shunsuke, Yonenaga Kazumichi
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery II, Nihon University School of Dentistry, 1-8-13 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-8310, Japan.
Department of Implant dentistry, Dental Hospital, Nihon University School of Dentistry, 1-8-13 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-8310, Japan.
Int J Implant Dent. 2025 Sep 26;11(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s40729-025-00647-1.
This systematic review evaluated the implant survival rate and prosthetic complications of single implant-supported mandibular overdentures (1-IOD) and compared them with those of traditionally recommended two implant-supported mandibular overdentures (2-IOD).
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used as a reference for reporting this systematic review. The study protocol was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD420250644169). This review included 17 randomized controlled trials that compared 1-IOD and 2-IOD, with a follow-up period of at least 12 months after denture placement. The assessed outcomes included implant survival rate, denture fractures, denture relining, O-ring replacement, and metal housing reattachment. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool.
This meta-analysis revealed no difference in implant survival rates between the 1- and 2-IOD groups over a 5-year period. In the subgroup analysis, overdenture fractures, denture remakes, and metal housing reattachments were more frequently observed in the 1-IOD group, whereas no statistically significant differences were found in the need for relining or O-ring replacement.
Although 1-IOD may be a less invasive alternative to 2-IOD, careful consideration is necessary because of its increased incidence of prosthetic complications.
本系统评价评估了单颗种植体支持的下颌覆盖义齿（1-IOD）的种植体存活率和修复并发症，并将其与传统推荐的两颗种植体支持的下颌覆盖义齿（2-IOD）进行比较。
本系统评价采用系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）指南作为报告参考。研究方案已在PROSPERO数据库中进行前瞻性注册（注册号：CRD420250644169）。本评价纳入了17项比较1-IOD和2-IOD的随机对照试验，义齿佩戴后随访期至少为12个月。评估的结果包括种植体存活率、义齿骨折、义齿重衬、O形环更换和金属外壳重新附着。使用Cochrane偏倚风险2工具评估纳入研究中的偏倚风险。
这项Meta分析显示，在5年期间，1-IOD组和2-IOD组的种植体存活率没有差异。在亚组分析中，1-IOD组中义齿骨折、义齿重做和金属外壳重新附着的情况更为常见，而在重衬或O形环更换需求方面未发现统计学上的显著差异。
虽然1-IOD可能是2-IOD侵入性较小的替代方案，但由于其修复并发症发生率较高，仍需谨慎考虑。
