-
Journal of Oral Biology and... 2023Though, mechanical dental implant and supported prosthesis failures are considered significant, a comprehensive evaluation is lacking. A systematic review analyzing... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Though, mechanical dental implant and supported prosthesis failures are considered significant, a comprehensive evaluation is lacking. A systematic review analyzing different aspects related to such failures was therefore done.
METHODS
Electronic search was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane Library for articles published between 1981 and 2021. Articles were selected using predefined criteria. Data extraction was based on mechanical complications associated with dental implants, prosthetic implant failures, survival rate of implants, mechanical failure of implants placed in the maxilla and mandible, and mechanical complications associated with implant supported over dentures. Quality of included studies was assessed. Meta-analysis for heterogenicity testing, publication bias and implant failure assessment was conducted using MedCalc® Statistical Software version 19.7.
RESULTS
Eighteen retrospective and prospective studies were included following PRISMA guidelines. Mechanical complications were more in the initial 9 years but reduced later. Abutment screw loosening was one of the more common mechanical complications (16.21%). Maxillary implant failure was greater compared to mandibular implant failure with an odds ratio of 4.66 (95% CI -3.21- 6.75). Failure of implant supported overdentures due to mechanical complications were 3% in the fixed effect, and 2.9% in the random effect model ( < 0.05). The overall prevalence of mechanical failure was between 5.6% and 7.7% (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Mechanical failures of implant and supported prosthesis have similar prevalence to biological and esthetic failures, and therefore need to be given due credence. Identifying specific factors contributing to such failures can help reduce incidence.
PubMed: 36923071
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2023.02.009 -
Cureus Sep 2023Restoration of hemimandibulectomy defects following tumour extirpation to restore oral function is a herculean task for practitioners. Prosthetic treatment alternatives... (Review)
Review
Restoration of hemimandibulectomy defects following tumour extirpation to restore oral function is a herculean task for practitioners. Prosthetic treatment alternatives available for rehabilitation of acquired hemimandibulectomy defects according to mandibular reconstruction type and extent (Cantor-Curtis classification) are unclear. This systematic review aims to assess the spectrum of prosthodontic rehabilitation approaches with regard to reconstruction type and extent of mandibular surgical defects. The databases incorporated for literature search were Google Scholar and Medline (PubMed). Relevant search terms for hemimandibulectomy and reconstruction with prosthetic rehabilitation were used. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles using eligibility criteria; published case reports and case series in the English language and depicting prosthodontic treatment modality of patients greater than 15 years were included. A total of 202 records were identified from the database search of which 19 duplicates were removed. The remaining articles were assessed for eligibility, and 55 articles (comprising 58 cases) were finally included in the study. This review revealed various prosthetic alternatives ranging from guide flange, twin occlusion, palatal ramp, conventional to hybrid partial and complete dentures to implant-supported prosthesis including a few innovative prosthetic approaches. This systematic review provides a plethora of prosthodontic rehabilitation approaches according to the extent of hemimandibular surgical defect and type of reconstruction. This will facilitate practitioners and prosthodontists in sequential treatment planning and management of hemimandibulectomy cases in their routine practice.
PubMed: 37799255
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44647 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2022Although mandibular implant-supported overdentures have been highly recommended as a treatment option, a consensus on the type of attachment systems that can be used to... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Although mandibular implant-supported overdentures have been highly recommended as a treatment option, a consensus on the type of attachment systems that can be used to increase implant and prostheses survivability is lacking.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare different types of attachments for retention by investigating outcome measures such as implant and prosthesis survival rates and biological and prosthesis complications in participants with a mandibular implant-supported overdenture.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The search was performed in the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021253566). An analysis of association was conducted between different attachment systems and implant and overdenture survival rates in randomized controlled clinical trials.
RESULTS
The initial search indicated 477 studies, of which 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for analysis. A total of 2154 implants and 737 overdentures were analyzed in the meta-analysis. The main results indicated the failure rate for dental implants to be 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.2) and overdentures 4.2% (95% CI, 1.6 to 10.5), respectively. With regard to different attachment systems, a similar failure rate was identified with bar-type retention (7.7% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.1), magnetic retention systems (7.6% to 95% CI, 2.2 to 22.7), and ball-type retention (6.8% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 14.3). No significant difference was found in biological complications for splinted and unsplinted implant overdentures (P=.902). Regarding prosthetic complications, the most favorable groups were LOCATOR attachments followed by telescopic and Conus, bar, and ball attachments. Magnet attachments had higher prosthetic complications (7.4 times) than the other attachments.
CONCLUSIONS
Implants and implant-supported mandibular overdentures showed a high survival rate irrespective of the attachment system used. Splinting implants did not significantly affect the rate of biological complications. Prosthetic complications were most common for magnet and least common for LOCATOR attachments.
PubMed: 36115712
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.08.004 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2023The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9-2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1-16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P < 0.001). The TMJ prosthesis appears to be reserved for patients with persistent pain, bony or fibrous ankylosis, or osteomyelitis after primary closed or open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle.
Topics: Humans; Mandibular Condyle; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; Tooth Ankylosis; Mandibular Fractures; Temporomandibular Joint; Ankylosis
PubMed: 35752530
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.014 -
Journal of Personalized Medicine Mar 2023The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is a complex structure in the cranio-maxillomandibular region. The pathological changes of the joint cause deficiencies at different... (Review)
Review
The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is a complex structure in the cranio-maxillomandibular region. The pathological changes of the joint cause deficiencies at different levels, making its replacement necessary in some cases. The aim of this article is to analyze the current indications, treatment and criteria, and follow-up using a systematic review and case series. A systematic review was carried out, identifying the indications for the use of a customized TMJ prosthesis and evaluating criteria and validation in the international literature. After review and exclusion, 8 articles were included with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. The age of the subjects was between 18 and 47 years old. In 226 patients, 310 TMJ prostheses were installed, 168 bilaterally and 142 unilaterally. In most of the articles, a good condition in the follow-up was observed, with a reduction in pain and better conditions of mandibular movement and function. TMJ prosthesis and replacement is a protocolized, defined, stable, and predictable procedure. Indications and criteria must be evaluated by specialists and patients related to the pathology involved in TMJ deformity or degeneration. Randomized research with an accurate diagnosis and follow-up is necessary to obtain the best indication for this treatment.
PubMed: 36983715
DOI: 10.3390/jpm13030533 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Dec 2022Prosthetic rehabilitation, especially with removable complete dentures (CDs), can contribute to speech problems, although the prevalence of the problem is unclear. (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Prosthetic rehabilitation, especially with removable complete dentures (CDs), can contribute to speech problems, although the prevalence of the problem is unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the influence of implant-supported fixed complete dentures (FCDs), implant-supported overdentures, and removable CDs on speech articulation disorders in patients with at least 1 completely edentulous jaw.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study was prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020182705). The PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through April 2020 to identify clinical trials comparing maxillary and/or mandibular implant-supported dentures with removable CD use in terms of speech articulation in participants with at least 1 completely edentulous jaw. The risk of bias of selected studies was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools, and the quality of evidence was tested by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
Initially, 2586 articles were identified, and their titles and abstracts were read. Sixteen articles were read in full, and 8 studies (4 paired clinical trials and 4 cross-sectional studies) were included in this review. In total, 290 prosthesis users aged 29 to 90 years, approximately 44 of whom had hearing difficulties, were included. Four studies had a low risk of bias, and 4 studies had a high risk of bias. Distortions of the /s/ phoneme were observed more often in the first 6 months of maxillary FCD use than with removable CD use. Speech articulation did not differ between mandibular FCD and removable CD users. The quality of evidence for speech articulation disorders was low.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the low quality of evidence on speech articulation disorders, further research on speech articulation disorders in prosthesis wearers is needed.
Topics: Humans; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Speech; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Implants; Denture, Complete; Denture, Overlay; Jaw, Edentulous; Articulation Disorders; Patient Satisfaction
PubMed: 33865562
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.03.006 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Feb 2021To evaluate implant and prosthetic survival rates of full-arch rehabilitations retained by three implants in patients with edentulous mandibles. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate implant and prosthetic survival rates of full-arch rehabilitations retained by three implants in patients with edentulous mandibles.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This systematic review was developed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The focused question was: Are fixed mandibular 3-implant retained prostheses safe and predicable for full-arch mandibular prostheses? The Medline/PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were used to conduct the systematic search for clinical trials on fixed mandibular 3-implant retained prostheses published between 1999 and 2020. Only English-language studies that presented information on implant and prosthetic survival were included.
RESULTS
A total of 302 studies were identified, of which 13 addressed the inclusion criteria. Additionally, 574 participants were included in these studies. As reported, 73 (4.57%) of 1596 implants failed, with a survival rate of 95.43%. In addition, the mean survival rate of the presented prostheses was 89.66%. The mean marginal bone loss was 1.09 mm.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of the present review, implant and prosthetic survival rates of fixed mandibular 3-implant retained prostheses were similar to those of full-arch mandibular prostheses retained by four or more implants. Further research exploring the topic is necessary.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Mandible; Mandibular Prosthesis
PubMed: 32893938
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13253 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Nov 2023Standard-diameter dental implants are not always applicable because of anatomic limitations of the residual ridge. Thus, mini-implants have been increasingly used and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Standard-diameter dental implants are not always applicable because of anatomic limitations of the residual ridge. Thus, mini-implants have been increasingly used and offer an alternative. However, data regarding prosthetic complications, maintenance factors, and clinical outcomes are limited.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare prosthetic complications and maintenance events and clinical outcomes in residual ridges rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures (IODs) by using standard implants or mini-implants.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Nine electronic databases were searched. Quantitative analyses to measure the risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were applied. Those methods were used to assess prosthetic complications and maintenance events (abutment adjustments, replacement of retentive element, occlusal adjustment, and overdenture fracture) and clinical outcomes related to postoperative pain, probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), marginal bone loss (MBL), and implant survival rate.
RESULTS
Altogether, 7 publications were selected. Mini-implants presented reduced abutment adjustments (RR 0.23 [0.07, 0.73], P=.01), replacement of retentive element (RR 0.41 [0.31, 0.54], P<.001), occlusal adjustment (RR 0.53 [0.31, 0.91], P=.02), and overdenture fracture (RR 0.46 [0.23, 0.94], P=.03) compared with standard implants. Additionally, mini-implants presented lower values for PI at 6 months (SMD -0.27 [-0.47, -0.08], P=.006) and 12 months (SMD -0.25 [-0.46, -0.05], P=.01). No additional tangible differences were noted.
CONCLUSIONS
Mini-implants might be an alternative choice based on the number of prosthetic complications and maintenance events. This was also confirmed by the comparable clinical data between standard implants and mini-implants.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Denture, Overlay; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Alveolar Bone Loss; Mandible
PubMed: 35120735
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.010 -
Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice Sep 2023Dental implants are considered an ideal treatment for a missing single tooth. Immediate loading of implants can hasten the procedure, providing comfort to the patients.... (Review)
Review
Dental implants are considered an ideal treatment for a missing single tooth. Immediate loading of implants can hasten the procedure, providing comfort to the patients. Recently, immediate loading of implants has gained much importance as it helps hasten the procedure and provides more comfort to patients. A previous systematic review published 5 years ago compared the success rates between immediate and conventional loading. There are several factors that influence the success rate of implants that were not discussed in detail in the previous review. Hence, the present systematic review is done to report differences in the outcomes from single implant restorations of missing teeth in the posterior region in patients who were subjected to immediate loading and conventional loading. A follow up for 1 year was done. Electronic databases of Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for publications in the English Language during May 2021. The search results yielded 306 articles, out of which 225 were excluded based on title and abstract screening. Screening of the remaining 81 full text articles yielded 14 original research articles that satisfied the predefined inclusion criteria. Meta analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the data. The overall success rate of the immediate loading of a single implant is 94.31%. Implants in the maxillary region had a higher survival rate than those in the mandibular region. The age range between 18 and 80 years showed good prognosis and outcomes in older individuals. Good oral hygiene was emphasized for all patients to prevent any secondary conditions or delays in healing.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Humans; Middle Aged; Young Adult; Anodontia; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Tooth Loss
PubMed: 37794532
DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_884_22 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Oct 2023The aim of this systematic review was to compare treatment outcomes in terms of implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review was to compare treatment outcomes in terms of implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between narrow-diameter implants and regular-diameter implants (RDIs) for mandibular implant overdentures (MIOs).
METHODS
This study was based on the methodology adapted as per Cochrane. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for pertinent studies published by July 22, 2022. Outcome parameters included in this meta-analysis were implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, visual analogue scale score for patient satisfaction, and value of oral health impact profile.
RESULTS
A total of 782 non-duplicate articles and 83 clinical study registrations were identified from database and hand searches, of which 26 were eligible for full-text searches. Finally, 12 publications reporting on 8 independent studies were included in this review. In the meta-analysis, implant survival rate and marginal bone loss did not significantly differ between narrow-diameter implants and RDIs. Regarding RDIs, narrow-diameter implants were associated with significantly better outcomes in general patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life than RDIs for mandibular overdentures.
CONCLUSIONS
Narrow-diameter implants have competitive treatment outcomes compared to RDIs in terms of implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and PROMs. [Correction added on July 21, 2023, after first online publication: The abbreviation RDIs was changed to PROMs in the preceding sentence.] Thus, narrow-diameter implants might be an alternative treatment option for MIOs in situations with limited alveolar bone volume.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Quality of Life; Denture, Overlay; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Treatment Outcome; Mandible; Alveolar Bone Loss
PubMed: 37365991
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13726