-
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2015The purpose of this first part of a two-part series was to review the literature concerning the indications, contraindications, advantages, disadvantages and surgical... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this first part of a two-part series was to review the literature concerning the indications, contraindications, advantages, disadvantages and surgical techniques of the lateralization and transposition of the inferior alveolar nerve, followed by the placement of an implant in an edentulous atrophic posterior mandible.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A comprehensive review of the current literature was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines by accessing the NCBI PubMed and PMC database, academic sites and books. The articles were searched from January 1997 to July 2014 and comprised English-language articles that included adult patients between 18 and 80 years old with minimal residual bone above the mandibular canal who had undergone inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) repositioning with a minimum 6 months of follow-up.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies were included in this review. Nine were related to IAN transposition, 4 to IAN lateralization and 3 to both transposition and lateralization. Implant treatment results and complications were presented.
CONCLUSIONS
Inferior alveolar nerve lateralization and transposition in combination with the installation of dental implants is sometimes the only possible procedure to help patients to obtain a fixed prosthesis, in edentulous atrophic posterior mandibles. With careful pre-operative surgical and prosthetic planning, imaging, and extremely precise surgical technique, this procedure can be successfully used for implant placement in edentulous posterior mandibular segments.
PubMed: 25937873
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2014.6102 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry May 2021Evidence provided by implant-supported mandibular overdenture research on different loading protocols is important. However, methodological inconsistency, as well as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Evidence provided by implant-supported mandibular overdenture research on different loading protocols is important. However, methodological inconsistency, as well as inadequate reporting of results, hampers a consistent decision in terms of clinical applicability.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether immediate or early loading protocols can achieve comparable clinical outcomes when compared with a conventional loading protocol in edentulous patients rehabilitated with mandibular overdentures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
In accordance with the Participant, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome strategy, prospective clinical studies without restrictions as to language or follow-up period were included. The Cochrane collaboration and ROBINS-I tools were used for quality assessment and risk-of-bias evaluation. The follow-up for the different outcomes ranged from 3 to 168 months, with the focus on implant success and survival rates, marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque index, and the implant stability quotient. Statistical analyses in which standard mean differences were applied with a 95% confidence interval when continuous data were included were performed. For dichotomous data, risk difference was adopted.
RESULTS
The search strategy resulted in 14 234 references. Twenty-three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences for plaque index at 12 months (standard mean difference=0.284 [0.022, 0.545], P=.033, I=35%), probing depth at 36 months (standard mean difference=0.460 [0.098, 0.823], P=.013, I=0%), and on pooled results for plaque index (standard mean difference=0.157 [0.031, 0.284], P=.015, I=18%) in which the conventional loading protocol presented lower indices than those of immediate loading protocol or early loading protocol. Implant stability quotient presented a statistically significant difference only at 3 months (standard mean difference=0.602 [0.309, 0.895], P<.001, I=0%) with higher values for the conventional loading protocol. For the other parameters, statistically significant differences (P>.05) were not found.
CONCLUSIONS
Immediate loading protocol or early loading protocolfor mandibular overdentures has been determined to be a well-established treatment and worthy of consideration in clinical practice.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32684353
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.04.017 -
International Journal of Oral and... Sep 2018The aim of this meta-analysis was to verify the clinical viability of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures (SIMO). An electronic search of the PubMed and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this meta-analysis was to verify the clinical viability of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures (SIMO). An electronic search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed (end date July 2017); this was supplemented by a manual search of the literature. Only prospective clinical trials and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated SIMO with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. The meta-analysis was based on the Mantel-Haenszel method. Dental implant and prosthetic failure were the dichotomous outcome measures; these were evaluated through the risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (OR), with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Of 499 articles identified, nine fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 205 implants were placed in patients with a mean age of 64.1 years; the cumulative survival rate was 96.6% over a mean follow-up period of 37.3 months. The procedure used (SIMO vs. two implant-retained mandibular overdenture) did not affect dental implant failure (P=0.45) or prosthetic failure (P=0.65): RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.91-1.23) and RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.51-1.51), respectively; OR 2.56 (95% CI 0.27-24.39; P=0.41) and OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.15-1.26; P=0.13), respectively. Within the limitations of this systematic review and meta-analysis, SIMO with a complete denture as the opposing arch may be considered an alternative treatment for completely edentulous patients. However, this study also confirmed the need for more RCTs on this topic.
Topics: Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Mandible
PubMed: 29459128
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2018.01.021 -
Quintessence International (Berlin,... 2020To evaluate the influence of implant splinting on peri-implant marginal bone level and implant failures in completely edentulous patients who have been rehabilitated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the influence of implant splinting on peri-implant marginal bone level and implant failures in completely edentulous patients who have been rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures.
METHOD AND MATERIALS
A literature search of electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL]) was performed, with the last search conducted in July 2019. Randomized controlled trials with at least a 12-month follow-up period were selected. The review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Two comparisons were included in the meta-analysis: (1) Two-implant supported ball versus two-implant supported bar mandibular overdenture; (2): Two- versus four-implant supported bar mandibular overdenture.
RESULTS
Six randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in a quality assessment and meta-analysis. Pooled data revealed a nonsignificant difference in marginal bone level (I2 = 0%; P = 1; mean difference = 0.00; 95% CI -0.37 to 0.37) and implant failures (P = .24; risk ratio = 6.07; 95% CI 0.30 to 121.33) when two-implant ball overdentures were compared to two-implant bar overdentures. Similarly, there was no significant difference in marginal bone level (I2 = 59%; P = .59; mean difference = -0.16; 95% CI -0.73 to 0.41) or implant failures (I2 = 0%; P = .36; risk ratio = 2.03; 95% CI 0.45 to 9.16) when two- versus four-implant bar overdentures were compared.
CONCLUSION
Based on the findings of the meta-analysis, there is no influence of implant splinting on peri-implant marginal bone level and implant failures for completely edentulous patients rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures. However, this result should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of analyzed studies, most of them considered at unclear risk of bias. Well-designed randomized controlled trials with follow-up periods of at least 5 years are highly recommended to establish evidence with regard to the influence of implant splinting on mandibular overdentures.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Mouth, Edentulous; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32080685
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a44144 -
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related... Oct 2014The treatment of mandibular edentulism with implant fixed complete dental prostheses (IFCDPs) is a routinely used treatment option. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment of mandibular edentulism with implant fixed complete dental prostheses (IFCDPs) is a routinely used treatment option.
PURPOSE
The study aims to report the implant and prosthodontic survival rates associated with IFCDPs for the edentulous mandible after an observation period of a minimum 5 years.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic MEDLINE/PubMED search was conducted to identify randomized controlled clinical trials and prospective studies with IFCDPs for the edentulous mandible. Clinical studies with at least 5-year follow-up were selected. Pooled data were statistically analyzed and cumulative implant- and prosthesis survival rates were calculated by meta-analysis, regression, and chi-square statistics. Implant-related and prosthesis-related factors were identified and their impact on survival rates was assessed.
RESULTS
Seventeen prospective studies, including 501 patients and 2,827 implants, were selected for meta-analysis. The majority of the implants (88.5% of all placed implants) had been placed in the interforaminal area. Cumulative implant survival rates for rough surface ranged from 98.42% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 97.98-98.86) (5 years) to 96.86% (95% CI: 96.00-97.73) (10 years); smooth surface implant survival rates ranged from 98.93% (95% CI: 98.38-99.49) (5 years) to 97.88% (95% CI: 96.78-98.98) (10 years). The prosthodontic survival rates for 1-piece IFCDPs ranged from 98.61% (95% CI: 97.80-99.43) (5 years) to 97.25% (95% CI: 95.66-98.86) (10 years).
CONCLUSION
Treatment with mandibular IFCDPs yields high implant and prosthodontic survival rates (more than 96% after 10 years). Rough surface implants exhibited cumulative survival rates similar to the smooth surface ones (p > .05) in the edentulous mandible. The number of supporting implants and the antero-posterior implant distribution had no influence (p > .05) on the implant survival rate. The prosthetic design and veneering material, the retention type, and the loading protocol (delayed, early, and immediate) had no influence (p > .05) on the prosthodontic survival rates.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Humans; Mouth, Edentulous; Prosthesis Failure; Prosthodontics
PubMed: 23311617
DOI: 10.1111/cid.12036 -
The International Journal of Oral &... 2022To evaluate the performance of fixed complete dental prostheses supported by axial and tilted implants after at least 3 years of follow-up. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the performance of fixed complete dental prostheses supported by axial and tilted implants after at least 3 years of follow-up.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search plus a hand search up to April 2021 was undertaken. Clinical studies were selected using specific inclusion criteria, independent of the study design. The main outcomes were cumulative implant survival rate, marginal bone level changes, and complications, after ≥ 3 years of follow-up. The difference in outcomes between axial and tilted implants and between the maxilla and mandible was evaluated using meta-analysis and the Mantel-Cox test.
RESULTS
Out of 824 articles retrieved, 24 were included. In total, 2,637 patients were rehabilitated with 2,735 full prostheses (1,464 maxillary, 1,271 mandibular), supported by 5,594 and 5,611 tilted and axial implants, respectively. In a range between 3 and 18 years of follow-up, 274 implants failed. The cumulative implant survival rate was 93.91% and 99.31% for implants and prostheses, respectively. The mean marginal bone level change was moderate, exceeding 2 mm in only two studies. Marginal bone loss was significantly lower around axial compared with tilted implants (P < .0001), whereas it was not affected by arch (maxilla vs mandible; P = .17).
CONCLUSION
Fixed complete dental prostheses supported by tilted and axially placed implants represent a predictable option for the rehabilitation of edentulous arches. Further randomized trials are needed to determine the efficacy of this surgical approach and the remodeling pattern of marginal bone in the long term.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Maxilla; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36170316
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.9710 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jul 2022The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether the presence of third molars (3Ms) during sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible increases the risk of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether the presence of third molars (3Ms) during sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible increases the risk of complications. Searches were conducted using MEDLINE via PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane Central, Scopus, DOSS, and SIGLE via OpenGrey up to December 2020. Fifteen articles were included for evaluation and 14 in the meta-analysis, with a total of 3909 patients and 7651 sagittal split osteotomies (670 complications). Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) exposure in the proximal segment was the most frequent complication (n = 409), followed by bad splits (n = 151). Meta-analysis revealed no significant increase in the incidence of 3M-related IAN exposure (P = 0.45), post-surgical infections (P = 0.15), osteosynthesis material removal (P = 0.37), or bad splits (P = 0.23). The presence of 3Ms was associated with a reduced risk of nerve disorder (P = 0.05) and favoured bad splits in the lingual plate (P = 0.005). The quality of evidence was very low, mainly due to non-randomized study designs, high risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. This systematic review suggests that the removal of 3Ms before sagittal mandibular osteotomy does not reduce the incidence of complications. Thus, we recommend future better-designed studies with rigorous methodologies and adjustments for confounding factors.
Topics: Humans; Mandible; Mandibular Nerve; Mandibular Osteotomy; Molar, Third; Osteotomy, Sagittal Split Ramus; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34953646
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.12.004 -
The British Journal of Oral &... Jun 2019The aim of this systematic review (for which we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines) was to provide an overview of...
The aim of this systematic review (for which we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines) was to provide an overview of the protocols and clinical outcomes of dental implants placed in growing jaws. We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Science Direct databases in October and November, 2017. A total of 3492 studies were identified, and all the studies reporting the outcomes of dental implants placed during the growth phase were included in the study. After duplicates had been removed, 2133 studies were screened based on their titles and abstracts, and 162 were selected for reading. Finally, 28 studies were included in the review. Overall, 493 dental implants were placed in 147 patients aged from 3-18 years old with follow-up being from 1-20 years. The most common disorders seen that were associated with missing teeth were ectodermal dysplasia and dental trauma. The main complications reported were the infraocclusion positioning of dental implants in the maxillary arch and the rotation of dental implants in the mandibular arch. Dental implants were indicated for the anterior regions of the maxilla and mandible in patients over 10 years old, and placement of maxillary implants in a more coronal position was recommended. Consultations and adjustments to prostheses were required until growth had ceased. In growing jaws, dental implants require positional modifications, and they should be considered only under special circumstances.
Topics: Adolescent; Anodontia; Child; Child, Preschool; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Mandible; Maxilla; Maxillofacial Development
PubMed: 31076220
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2019.04.011 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Apr 2020This review evaluated the change in treatment outcomes after conversion from conventional removable partial denture (RPD) to implant-assisted removable partial denture... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This review evaluated the change in treatment outcomes after conversion from conventional removable partial denture (RPD) to implant-assisted removable partial denture (IARPD). The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), objective parameters for evaluation of functional performance, and biological and mechanical complication were evaluated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This systematic review was based on the Cochrane review methodology and followed the criteria of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus up to April 3, 2019. After the initial search, additional electronic and hand searches were performed to identify further studies, ongoing studies, and gray literature, without restrictions on language, year of publication, or publication type.
RESULTS
In total, 6,544 non-duplicate articles were identified, and 31 were eligible for full-text search. Finally, 19 publications based on 13 independent studies were selected. In the meta-analysis, general patient satisfaction was significantly increased (p < .05), and the improved mastication was remarkable oral function. In oral health-related quality of life, the oral health impact profile score was significantly improved, and improvements of physical pain and psychological disability were prominent (p < .05). Masticatory performance was improved in terms of maximum bite force, active occlusal contact area, and mandibular jaw movement (p < .05). The weighted mean survival rate of implants was 96.60%.
CONCLUSIONS
After conversion from conventional RPD to IARPD, the PROMs and masticatory performance significantly improved in partially edentulous patients under mandibular Kennedy classification I.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Partial, Removable; Humans; Mandible; Mastication; Patient Satisfaction; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31945212
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13574 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Jun 2022We aimed to evaluate whether there is a consensus among bi- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) evaluations of mandible condyle position and its rotation center. Also, if...
We aimed to evaluate whether there is a consensus among bi- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) evaluations of mandible condyle position and its rotation center. Also, if this data can be replicated in orthognathic surgery planning. The survey was carried out on the major databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Cochrane). Human or human bio models evaluations in 2D or 3D of mandibular condylar position concerning its fossa and rotational axis for orthognathic surgery planning were eligible. The heterogeneity of the studies and uncertainties in methodological biases did not allow us to identify the superiority of 2D or 3D methodology in determination of the condylar rotational axis. There is a lot of divergences in the definition of occlusal relationships among dental specialties. Although there was no consensus regarding condylar position in relation to the fossa, the most reported axis of rotation was positioned posterior-inferior. Weak scientific evidence and divergences in dental vocabulary shows the need for clinical studies with more accurate and transparent methodological design to standardize concepts. Despite we cannot affirm, we can suggest that the centric relation (CR) is not the condylar position when clinically manipulated in the posterior superior direction. This condylar position is the retruded contact position (RCt) while CR is the functional position of the condyle. In this way, the orthognathic surgery has two occlusal relationships during planning and execution. The ideal axis of rotation for orthognathic surgery planning must be fixed, permit individualization for each condyle and be reproducible. The 2D planning is obsolete as cannot provide all the necessary tools for an accurate planning.
Topics: Humans; Mandibular Condyle; Orthognathic Surgery; Orthognathic Surgical Procedures; Rotation
PubMed: 34237437
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2021.06.004