-
International Journal of Implant... May 2024The rise of stereolithographic surgical guides and digital workflow, combined with a better knowledge of materials and loading principle, has enabled the placement of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The rise of stereolithographic surgical guides and digital workflow, combined with a better knowledge of materials and loading principle, has enabled the placement of the temporary prosthesis at the time of implant placement. This scoping review aimed to assess the current knowledge available on stackable guides.
METHODS
The review focused on fully edentulous or requiring total edentulism patients. The procedure studied was the use of stackable guides for edentulous patients in order to place immediate temporary prostheses. The clinical endpoint was immediate placement of the provisional prosthesis after surgery combined with a prior bone reduction using a stackable guide.
RESULTS
12 case reports or case series articles met inclusion criteria, which did not allow an analysis by a systematic review. The included studies were case reports or case series. Most of the articles showed a base stabilized by 3 or 4 bone-pins, anchored in buccal or lingual part. Regarding the accuracy of bone reduction (ranged from 0.0248 mm to 1.98 mm) and implant placement when compared to planned, only 4 articles reported quantitative data. 11 articles showed an immediate loading with the transitional prosthesis after implant placement.
CONCLUSIONS
There are as yet no prospective or comparative studies on the efficiency of this technique. In a reliable way, stackable guides seem to be able to guide the practitioner from the flap elevation to the placement of the temporary screw-retained implant supported prosthesis. Given the lack of studies in this specific field of guided surgery, further studies are needed to confirm the clinical relevance of this technique.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Mouth, Edentulous
PubMed: 38819752
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-024-00547-w -
SICOT-J 2024Controversy exists on the best fixation for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Non-cemented fixation has been theorized to improve patient outcomes and longevity of...
PURPOSE
Controversy exists on the best fixation for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Non-cemented fixation has been theorized to improve patient outcomes and longevity of implantation but no study has focused on comparison between cemented or cementless posterior-stabilized implants despite being the most commonly or second most frequently utilized implant in most total knee replacement registries.
METHODS
Inclusion criteria with observational and interventional papers, and review articles that focused on patients with cementless and cemented PS TKAs were used to analyze outcomes such as implant survivorship, complication, or revision rates. Using a combination of keywords, a systematic search was performed on Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library for Meta-Analysis.
RESULTS
When using the specified criteria, only 8 studies were selected for full-text analysis and meta-analysis after eliminating screening duplicates, titles, and abstracts without full-text access. These eight studies contain 1652 patients, 693 in the non-cemented Group, and 959 in the cemented total knee prosthesis Group. The meta-analysis revealed the advantage of cementless fixation over cemented fixation in implant survivorship, with 0.6% and 2.6% of aseptic loosening in each Group. The cumulative survival at 12 years was 97.4% for the cementless Group and 89.2% for the cemented Group. The subgroup with a stem showed a positive outcome for cementless fixation over cemented fixation regarding implant survivorship. No differences between the cemented and cementless TKAs were observed in patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, or radiolucent line development.
CONCLUSION
We observed comparable rates for cemented and cementless posterior-stabilized TKAs over a medium-term follow-up period.
PubMed: 38819292
DOI: 10.1051/sicotj/2024017 -
Cureus Apr 2024Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is a rare but serious complication following aortic valve replacement using either a transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)... (Review)
Review
Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Prosthesis-Specific Infective Endocarditis Subsequent to Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is a rare but serious complication following aortic valve replacement using either a transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This study aims to review the profiles and outcomes of PVE after surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Electronic searches were performed on Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed to retrieve related articles. To be included, study designs had to be randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational cohort studies (in English) with PVE patients that compared differences based on TAVI or SAVR. This review included data for 13,221 patients with PVE diagnoses. Of those, 2,109 patients had an initial SAVR, and 11,112 patients had an initial TAVI. There was no difference in the incidence of PVE in patients who had initial TAVI versus SAVR (1.05% versus 1.01% per person-year, p=0.98). However, the onset of early PVE was more frequently observed in the TAVI group (risk ratio (RR): 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.14, 2.08], p=0.005). Patients in the TAVI group had a lower indication for surgery to treat PVE when compared to SAVR (RR: 0.55, 95%CI [0.44, 0.69], p<0.001). was more likely to be the source of PVE in patients who had previous TAVI (RR: 1.34, 95%CI [1.17, 1.54], p<0.001). Also, was more frequently observed as a cause of PVE in the TAVI group (RR: 1.49, 95%CI [1.21, 1.82], p<0.001). Patients who underwent SAVR and TAVI had similar incidences of PVE. However, patients who underwent SAVR had a greater indication for surgery to treat PVE, while those who underwent TAVI had higher comorbidities, a higher likelihood of early PVE, and a trend towards higher one-year mortality.
PubMed: 38817491
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59398 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jun 2024
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Female; Postoperative Complications; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Mammaplasty; Transgender Persons
PubMed: 38810155
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010922 -
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of sex on outcomes after aortic valve replacement.Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine... Jul 2024In recent years, extensive literature has been produced demonstrating inferior outcomes for women when compared with men undergoing heart valve interventions. Herein, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
In recent years, extensive literature has been produced demonstrating inferior outcomes for women when compared with men undergoing heart valve interventions. Herein, we seek to analyze the literature comparing outcomes between men and women undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase was conducted for articles comparing differences in outcomes between adult men and women undergoing SAVR. One thousand nine hundred and ninety titles were screened, of which 75 full texts were reviewed, and a total of 19 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review.
RESULTS
Pooled estimates of mortality demonstrated that women tended to have lower rates of survival within the first 30 days post-SAVR, although mid-term and long-term mortality did not differ significantly up to 10 years postoperatively. Pooled estimates of postoperative data indicated no difference in the rates of stroke and postoperative bleeding. Rates of aortic valve reoperation and acute kidney injury favored women.
CONCLUSION
Despite the inferior outcomes for women post-SAVR that have been reported in recent years, the results of this meta-analysis demonstrate comparable results between the sexes with comparable mid- to long-term mortality in data pooled from the literature. Although mortality favored men in the short term, rates of aortic valve reoperation and acute kidney injury favored women. Future investigation into this field should focus on identifying discrepancies in diagnosis and initial surgical management in order to address any potential factors contributing to discrepant short-term outcomes.
GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT
http://links.lww.com/JCM/A651.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Aortic Valve; Sex Factors; Treatment Outcome; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications; Risk Assessment; Time Factors; Reoperation; Aged; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Health Status Disparities; Middle Aged
PubMed: 38809253
DOI: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000001635 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... May 2024Upper extremity limb loss profoundly impacts a patient's quality of life and well-being and carries a significant societal cost. Although osseointegration allows the...
BACKGROUND
Upper extremity limb loss profoundly impacts a patient's quality of life and well-being and carries a significant societal cost. Although osseointegration allows the attachment of the prosthesis directly to the bone, it is a relatively recent development as an alternative to conventional socket prostheses. The objective of this review was to identify reports on osseointegrated prosthetic embodiment for transhumeral amputations and assess the implant systems used, postoperative outcomes, and complications.
METHODS
A systematic review following PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines assessed functional outcomes, implant longevity and retention, activities of daily living, and complications associated with osseointegrated prostheses in transhumeral amputees.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 794 articles, with eight of these articles (retrospective analyses and case series) meeting the inclusion criteria. Myoelectric systems equipped with Osseointegrated Prostheses for the Rehabilitation of Amputees implants have been commonly used as transhumeral osseointegration systems. The transhumeral osseointegrated prostheses offered considerable improvements in functional outcomes, with participants demonstrating enhanced range of motion and improved performance of activities compared with traditional socket-based prostheses. One study demonstrated the advantage of an osseointegrated implant as a bidirectional gateway for signal transmission, enabling intuitive control of a bionic hand.
CONCLUSIONS
Osseointegrated prostheses hold the potential to significantly improve the quality of life for individuals with transhumeral amputations. Continued research and clinical expansion are expected to lead to the realization of enhanced efficacy and safety in this technique, accompanied by cost reductions over time as a result of improved efficiencies and advancements in device design.
PubMed: 38808147
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005850 -
International Journal of Oral... May 2024To provide an overview of the outcomes of the use of autogenous platelet concentrates in immediate implant placement. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To provide an overview of the outcomes of the use of autogenous platelet concentrates in immediate implant placement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Based on an a priori protocol, a systematic search was performed of the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE via PubMed), Embase and Scopus databases. Randomised and non-randomised controlled clinical trials on immediate implant placement including at least one study arm with use of platelet-rich fibrin or platelet-rich plasma as a gap filler between immediately placed implants and the alveolar bone were included. A random-effects meta-analysis model was built to assess the primary outcomes of marginal bone loss and probing pocket depths between test (platelet concentrates) and control (no graft or other graft materials) groups. A risk of bias assessment was performed and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
A total of 20 trials (595 immediate implants placed in 454 individuals) were included in the meta-analytic model. Based on the data from studies with a minimum post-prosthetic loading period of 6 months after immediate implant placement, overall, the application of platelet concentrates was associated with significantly lower marginal bone loss and probing pocket depth compared to the control groups (mean difference -0.36 mm; P < 0.01 and mean difference -0.47 mm; P < 0.01, respectively). No additional benefit of application of platelet concentrates was detected regarding primary stability of immediate implants. Subgroup analysis revealed significantly lower marginal bone loss with xenogeneic bone alone compared to platelet concentrates alone as grafting material in immediate implant placement (mean difference 0.66 mm; P < 0.01). Evidence on soft tissue outcomes and aesthetic parameters was scarce.
CONCLUSIONS
A low level of certainty based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach indicates superior outcomes in terms of marginal bone loss and probing pocket depth in immediate implant placement with the use of platelet concentrates versus no graft. Future research should be tailored towards a standardised protocol for preparation of platelet concentrates and inclusion of soft tissue and aesthetic outcomes as well.
Topics: Humans; Platelet-Rich Fibrin; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Dental Implants; Alveolar Bone Loss; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38801329
DOI: No ID Found -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Jun 2024In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
A systematic review comparing different approaches for inflatable penile prosthesis revision: partial-component exchange, complete-component exchange, or reservoir "drain and retain".
INTRODUCTION
In cases of a noninfected malfunctioning inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) device, surgeons often opt to exchange all of the device rather than the defective component for fear of an increased infection rate and future mechanical dysfunction.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether partial-component exchange of an IPP device has comparable outcomes to complete explant and replacement of an IPP device with or without a retained reservoir.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2023, identifying studies reporting outcomes and complications of revision surgery for noninfected malfunctioning IPP devices. Three groups were compared: those undergoing single- or 2-component exchange, those with complete explantation and replacement, and those with replacement of all components while retaining the primary reservoir.
RESULTS
Analysis included 11 articles comprising 12 202 patients with complete device replacement, 234 with partial device exchange, and 151 with retained reservoirs following revision. Mean ages ranged from 62 to 68 years, with median follow-up times between 3 and 84 months. Partial-component exchange showed a higher infection rate (6.3%) as compared with complete replacement (2.7%) and reservoir retention (3.9%). Similarly, partial exchange had a higher complication rate (23.9%) when compared with complete replacement (11.3%) and reservoir retention (19.6%). Mechanical failure rates for partial exchange were similar across the 3 groups (10%, 2.8%, and 5.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Partial-component exchange during IPP revision is associated with higher infection and perioperative complication rates but comparable rates of mechanical failure as compared with complete-component replacement, with or without retaining the original reservoir.
Topics: Humans; Penile Prosthesis; Male; Reoperation; Prosthesis Failure; Penile Implantation; Device Removal
PubMed: 38798020
DOI: 10.1093/sxmrev/qeae035 -
The American Journal of Cardiology Jul 2024Previous research indicates varying stroke rates after mitral valve (MV) interventions. This study aimed to compare postprocedural stroke risks after transcatheter and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Previous research indicates varying stroke rates after mitral valve (MV) interventions. This study aimed to compare postprocedural stroke risks after transcatheter and surgical MV interventions. Electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2024 for studies comparing stroke rates after mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (mTEER), surgical MV repair/replacement, or guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). Primary end points were all-time and early (<30 days) stroke. Secondary outcomes included new-onset atrial fibrillation and 1-year all-cause mortality. A frequentist network meta-analysis was employed to compare outcomes. The network meta-analysis included 18 studies (3 randomized controlled trials and 15 observational), with 51,703 patients. mTEER was associated with a decreased risk of all-time (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41 to 0.89) and early stroke (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.51) compared with surgery, and a similar risk of all-time (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.76 to 3.12) and early stroke (OR 2.12, 95% CI 0.53 to 8.47) compared with GDMT. Conversely, surgery was associated with an increased risk of all-time (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.17 to 5.57) and early stroke (OR 5.15, 95% CI 1.27 to 20.84) compared with GDMT. There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.31) and 1-year all-cause mortality (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.24) between mTEER versus surgery. In conclusion, mTEER was associated with a lower risk of stroke and similar risks of new-onset atrial fibrillation and 1-year mortality compared with surgical MV interventions. Further studies are needed to understand the mechanisms of stroke and to determine strategies to reduce stroke risk after MV interventions.
Topics: Humans; Stroke; Network Meta-Analysis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Postoperative Complications; Mitral Valve; Atrial Fibrillation; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Cardiac Catheterization; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38796036
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.05.030 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Jul 2024We reviewed the literature to examine if the thickness of the sinus membrane is a risk factor for perforation during lateral sinus lift surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We reviewed the literature to examine if the thickness of the sinus membrane is a risk factor for perforation during lateral sinus lift surgery.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases till 4th December 2023 for studies examining the risk of perforation with different sinus membrane thicknesses. Studies reporting sinus membrane thickness in perforation and non-perforation cases were also included.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were eligible. All studies used cone beam computed tomography for measuring sinus membrane thickness. Meta-analysis showed that sinus membrane thickness was significantly lower in perforation cases as compared to non-perforation cases (MD: -0.91 95% CI: -1.48, -0.33 I2=94%). Four studies used 2mm as the cut-off to define thick and thin sinus membranes. Pooled analysis failed to demonstrate any significant difference in perforation rates (OR: 0.97 95% CI: 0.44, 2.17 I2=56%). Meta-analysis of studies using 1.5mm (OR: 0.66 95% CI: 0.29, 1.48 I2=72%) and 1mm cut-off (OR: 0.93 95% CI: 0.34, 2.56) also demonstrated similar non-significant results.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study shows that the sinus membrane is significantly thinner in cases with perforations as compared to those with no perforations. However, a meta-analysis based on different membrane thickness cut-offs failed to demonstrate a relationship between thinner sinus membranes and a higher risk of perforation. There is a need for further studies examining the role of sinus membrane thickness on perforation rates.
Topics: Humans; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Maxillary Sinus; Risk Factors; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Intraoperative Complications; Dental Implants
PubMed: 38794940
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.26545