-
Implant Dentistry Apr 2016The aim was to systematically review the efficacy of vitamin D3 (VD3) supplementation on the osseointegration of implants. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim was to systematically review the efficacy of vitamin D3 (VD3) supplementation on the osseointegration of implants.
METHODS
The addressed focused question was "does VD3 supplementation affect osseointegration around implants?" Indexed databases were searched from 1969 up to and including March 2015 using various key words including: "Bone to implant contact"; "implant"; "vitamin D"; and "osseointegration." Letters to the editor, case reports/case series, reviews, and articles published in languages other than English were excluded. The pattern of the present systematic review was customized to primarily summarize the pertinent data.
RESULTS
Six experimental studies (4 in rodents and 2 in rabbits) were included. Number of titanium implants placed ranged between 28 and 100 implants. Results from 5 studies showed that VD3 supplementation enhanced new bone formation and/or bone to implant contact (BIC) around implants. One study showed no significant difference in BIC and new bone formation around VD3 coated and noncoated implants. One study reported that insulin therapy with adjunct VD3 supplementation enhances new bone formation around implants in diabetic rats than when insulin replacement therapy is used alone.
CONCLUSION
Efficacy of VD3 supplementation on osseointegration of implants remains controversial and requires further investigations.
Topics: Cholecalciferol; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Osseointegration; Treatment Outcome; Vitamins
PubMed: 26886807
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000390 -
Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Jun 2024This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) in enhancing bone integration with dental implants. (Review)
Review
AIM
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) in enhancing bone integration with dental implants.
METHOD
PubMed, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched. Studies assessing PBM effectiveness with defined intervention/control groups were included, while those lacking specified laser types, involving severe maxillofacial defects or surgery, and not reporting outcomes related to dental implant osseointegration post-PBM therapy were excluded. The studies' risk of bias was assessed using Robvis for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I for non-RCTs. The meta-analysis was conducted utilizing a random-effects model at a significance level of 0.01.
RESULTS
The study reviewed 26 papers involving 571 patients undergoing dental implant procedures with PBM/Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) or placebo/control. Implant stability quotients (ISQ) analysis showed a non-significant difference (p=0.06, mean difference: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.75, I=28%), while the Periotest method indicated significant improvement in stability (p<0.01, mean difference: -0.51, 95% CI: -0.78 to -0.24, I=71%). PBM resulted in a significant bone density increase (p<0.01, mean difference: 26, 95% CI: 6.93 to 45.06, I=91%), but marginal bone loss showed no significant difference (p=0.11, mean difference: 0.00, 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.05, I=45%). Implant survival rate did not significantly differ (p=0.73, mean difference: 1.56, 95% CI: 0.38 to 6.46, I=0%). Most studies raised concerns regarding randomization.
CONCLUSION
PBM could improve implant stability, as assessed with Periotest, and increase bone density, enhancing osseointegration. However, implant stability assessed with ISQ, marginal bone loss, and implant survival rate were comparable between the study groups.
PubMed: 38914185
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2024.104256 -
International Journal of Implant... Dec 2016Dental implant surgery has developed to a widely used procedure for dental rehabilitation and is a secure and predictable procedure. Local and systemic risk factors can... (Review)
Review
Dental implant surgery has developed to a widely used procedure for dental rehabilitation and is a secure and predictable procedure. Local and systemic risk factors can result in higher failure rates. Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that goes in with hyperglycemia and causes multifarious side effects. Diabetes as a relative contraindication for implant surgery is controversially discussed. Because the number of patients suffering from diabetes increases, there are more diabetic patients demanding implant procedures. We aimed to answer the PICO question "Do diabetic patients with dental implants have a higher complication rate in comparison to healthy controls?" by a systematic literature search based on the PRISMA statement. We identified 22 clinical studies and 20 publications of aggregated literature, which were quite heterogeneous concerning methods and results. We conclude that patients with poorly controlled diabetes suffer from impaired osseointegration, elevated risk of peri-implantitis, and higher level of implant failure. The influence of duration of the disease is not fully clear. The supportive administration of antibiotics and chlorhexidine seems to improve implant success. When diabetes is under well control, implant procedures are safe and predictable with a complication rate similar to that of healthy patients.
PubMed: 27747697
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-016-0038-2 -
Journal of Biological Regulators and... 2020The conventional use of prosthetic custom-design socket is affected by discomfort related to wellknown problems: sweating, sores or skin irritation, excessive weight and...
The conventional use of prosthetic custom-design socket is affected by discomfort related to wellknown problems: sweating, sores or skin irritation, excessive weight and harness, impaired body image, that lead to a high rate of abandonment. Osseointegrated prosthetic implants for limb amputation are progressively evolving to overcome limitations of socket. The aim of this article is to present a systematic review of the use, safety in terms of rate of infection and complications, and reported outcomes of upper and lower limb osseointegrated prosthetic implants. A systematic search was carried out for studies that evaluated outcomes of osseointegration technique in case of upper and lower limb amputees according to the PRISMA guidelines with a PRISMA checklist and algorithm. MINORS score was used for methodologic assessment. 17 articles about the treatment of patients with upper or lower limb amputation treated with an osseointegrated prostesis were included. The overall rate of infections was 32%. All the clinical outcomes reported were related to lower limb. No clinical data for upper limb was found. The postoperative mean value of MCS and PCS SF-36 and Q-TFA was 55.1, 45.4 and 73.8 respectively, while six minute walk test (6MWT) and the timed up and go (TUG) test scored an average value of 388 meters and 11.5 seconds respectively. MINORS score ranged from 5 to 13, with a median of 11 [interquartile range (IQR), 9-11]. The osseointegration is associated to a high rate of postoperative complications but, significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared to preoperative time are shown. The data available from the literature are limited but suggest good clinical outcomes and significant survivorship of the implants. Further clinical studies are needed to establish which kind of implant is associated to higher clinical performance and lower rate of postoperative complications and infections.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputees; Artificial Limbs; Humans; Osseointegration; Postoperative Complications; Prosthesis Implantation; Treatment Outcome; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 33261296
DOI: No ID Found -
The International Journal of Oral &... 2017In indexed literature, a systematic review of the efficacy of statins in enhancing osseointegration is lacking. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
In indexed literature, a systematic review of the efficacy of statins in enhancing osseointegration is lacking. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of local and systemic statin delivery on the osseointegration of implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To address the focused question, "Does local and systemic statin delivery affect osseointegration around implants?", indexed databases were searched from 1965 through November 2015 using various keywords. Letters to the Editor, case reports/case series, historic reviews, and commentaries were excluded. The pattern of this systematic review was customized to primarily summarize the pertinent data.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies were included. All studies were experimental and were performed in animal models. In seven studies, statins were delivered systemically via oral, intraperitoneal, intraosseous, subcutaneous, and percutaneous routes. Among the 12 studies, where statins were delivered locally, statin-coated implants were used in seven studies, whereas in the remaining studies, statins were delivered via topical application on the bone cavities. The follow-up duration ranged between 1 and 12 weeks. Results from 18 studies showed that statin administration enhanced new bone formation (NBF) around implants and/or bone-to-implant contact. One study showed that statin-coated implant surfaces impaired osseointegration. Seven studies reported that statin administration enhanced NBF around implants in osteoporotic rats.
CONCLUSION
On experimental grounds, local and systemic statin delivery seems to enhance osseointegration; however, from a clinical perspective, further studies are needed to assess the role of statins in promoting osseointegration around dental implants.
Topics: Animals; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Drug Administration Routes; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Models, Animal; Osseointegration; Rats; Titanium
PubMed: 28494034
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.4955 -
Implant Dentistry Feb 2018This review considers possible surgical treatment modalities for induced periimplantitis to regain re-osseointegration as reported in the recent literature. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This review considers possible surgical treatment modalities for induced periimplantitis to regain re-osseointegration as reported in the recent literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic searches in MEDLINE/PubMed and Google Scholar databases were performed on experimental studies considering induced periimplantitis and attempts to achieve re-osseointegration from 2003 up to December 2016. Conflicts about articles were solved by authors' discussion.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies of 159 were finally included in the review.
DISCUSSION
Various implant surface decontamination techniques chemical and/or mechanical have been used either alone or simultaneously with/without guided bone regeneration. Despite the access-flap surgery, it was observed that application of single decontamination measure either chemical or mechanical was not adequate to provide a better treatment outcome. Laser application such as CO2, diode, and Er: YAG has been a new treatment approach used for periimplantitis treatment. Er: YAG laser had showed no implant surface alteration and provided favorable environment for re-osseointegration.
CONCLUSION
Promising results were observed in the studies that used combination of bone substitutes together with guided bone regeneration for the regenerative therapy. Regarding implant surfaces, better re-osseointegration was observed with rough implant surfaces rather than smooth ones.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Humans; Osseointegration; Peri-Implantitis
PubMed: 29329120
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000712 -
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Mar 2024This systematic review aimed to determine whether differences in the macro-geometry of titanium implants promote changes in osseointegration. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review aimed to determine whether differences in the macro-geometry of titanium implants promote changes in osseointegration.
MATERIAL AND METHOD
SCOPUS, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched in June 2021. In addition, it was performed a manual search of the reference lists of the included articles. Eligibility criteria were in vivo studies that addressed the effect of titanium implant macro-geometry on osseointegration, studies that evaluated periodontally healthy models, and papers indexed in Journal Citation Reports.
RESULTS
The database search resulted in 1037 articles. Of the 19 articles selected for full reading, 16 remained in this systematic review. These had a high heterogeneity making it hard to perform statistical analysis of the data, so a descriptive analysis was performed.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the studies included in this systematic review, implant macro-geometry provides influences on osseointegration. In this sense, the various isolated characteristics (thread type, thread pitch, thread depth, face angle) should be studied so that the implant geometry can balance the compressive stress and tensile stress and produce a minimum shear force.
Topics: Humans; Osseointegration; Dental Implants; Titanium
PubMed: 36171302
DOI: 10.1007/s10006-022-01116-4 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Jun 2021Ca-P coatings on Ti implants have demonstrated good osseointegration capability due to their similarity to bone mineral matter. Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web... (Review)
Review
Ca-P coatings on Ti implants have demonstrated good osseointegration capability due to their similarity to bone mineral matter. Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) were searched electronically in February 2021 for preclinical studies in unmodified experimental animals, with at least four weeks of follow-up, measuring bone-to-implant contact (BIC). Although 107 studies were found in the initial search, only eight experimental preclinical studies were included. Adverse events were selected by two independent investigators. The risk of bias assessment of the selected studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool. Finally, a meta-analysis of the results found no statistical significance between implants coated with Ca-P and implants with etched conventional surfaces (difference of means, random effects: 5.40; 99% CI: -5.85, 16.65). With the limitations of the present review, Ca-P-coated Ti surfaces have similar osseointegration performance to conventional etched surfaces. Future well-designed studies with large samples are required to confirm our findings.
PubMed: 34199366
DOI: 10.3390/ma14113015 -
Biology Feb 2021Chitosan is a natural polysaccharide extracted from the shells of crustaceans that has been proposed as a scaffold in tissue engineering. Certain studies have proven a... (Review)
Review
Chitosan is a natural polysaccharide extracted from the shells of crustaceans that has been proposed as a scaffold in tissue engineering. Certain studies have proven a greater osseointegration of titanium surfaces that are functionalized with chitosan. The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were electronically searched for in vivo studies. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Animal models, implant site, chitosan incorporation methods, and methods of analysis were emphasized. The selected studies were individually discussed regarding the coatings, osseointegration potential, and suitability of the experimental models used, analyzing their limitations. We concluded that chitosan-biofunctionalized titanium surfaces have greater osseointegration capacity that uncoated control titanium alloys.
PubMed: 33535712
DOI: 10.3390/biology10020102 -
International Journal of Dentistry 2022Many factors play a significant role in osseointegration and healing after dental implant insertion and restoration. Some factors are related to dental biomaterials,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many factors play a significant role in osseointegration and healing after dental implant insertion and restoration. Some factors are related to dental biomaterials, such as the dental implant, prosthesis, and grafting materials. Other factors can be connected to operator skills and accumulated experience. Local and systemic patient-related factors are crucial in determining the success of the dental implant. Thorough examination and analysis of local factors using available examination tools are vital to prepare the implant candidate for such treatment. The patient's systemic condition directly affects the healing of the dental implant. One of the most overlooked systemic factors is the patients' vitamin level, which influences bone formation around the implant and subsequent osseointegration. The current review examined the available literature regarding the association between vitamin supplementation and dental implant osseointegration.
METHODS
Data of this review were derived from recent research available on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were the relation between the vitamin serum and dental implant osseointegration or failure. The Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was followed to perform the review. The study's outcome was the need for vitamin supplementation to prevent implant failure.
RESULTS
Five human studies (including case reports, case series, and retrospective studies) and six animal studies. All included studies discussed the relationship between vitamin , early dental implant failure, and bone implant contact. Three retrospective studies found no significant relationship between vitamin supplementation and EDIFs in humans. On the other hand, one retrospective study showed a significant relationship in humans. A case report and case series claimed that the implant was successfully placed after vitamin supplementation. A total of four animal studies showed a significant relationship between vitamin supplementation and osseointegration of the dental implant. Two animal studies showed no significant association.
CONCLUSION
To ensure optimal treatment outcomes, it is recommended to supplement the patient with vitamin if the serum level is not within the normal range. Further clinical studies and case reports are needed to confirm the association between serum vitamin levels and osseointegration.
PubMed: 35069741
DOI: 10.1155/2022/2845902