-
Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery May 2022The use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and stemless anatomic total shoulder replacement has been increasing in the United States every year. Stemless humeral... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and stemless anatomic total shoulder replacement has been increasing in the United States every year. Stemless humeral components in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty are only approved for clinical trials in the United States with an investigational device exception with limited data.
METHODS
A systematic review on stemless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was conducted on November 25, 2020, using the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. All articles were reviewed by 2 independent evaluators, with any conflicts or issues resolved by consensus or a final decision by the senior author. The primary outcomes extracted were complications, radiographic results, and outcome scores.
RESULTS
We evaluated 10 studies that used either the Total Evolutive Shoulder System (TESS) or Verso implant. There were 430 total patients and 437 total procedures; 266 patients in the TESS group underwent a total of 272 procedures, and 164 patients in the Verso group underwent a total of 165 procedures. The mean age at the time of surgery was 73.8 years (range, 38-93 years). The mean follow-up period ranged from 6.4 to 101.6 months per study. There was an overall trend of improved clinical outcome scores, a 0.2% humeral component loosening rate, and an 11.2% complication rate.
CONCLUSIONS
This review shows that the clinical and functional outcomes following stemless or metaphyseal reverse total shoulder arthroplasty are quite promising, especially with the low rate of humeral-sided complications. There continues to be a need for additional long-term studies and randomized clinical trials.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder; Humans; Prosthesis Design; Shoulder Joint; Shoulder Prosthesis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35051541
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.12.017 -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Feb 2021This systematic review was performed to compare tooth, implant and prosthesis failures and biological and technical complications in toothimplant vs freestanding implant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
This systematic review was performed to compare tooth, implant and prosthesis failures and biological and technical complications in toothimplant vs freestanding implant supported fixed partial prostheses, in order to evaluate the effectiveness and predictability in combining teeth and implants in the same fixed partial prosthesis.
STUDY SELECTION
A comprehensive and systematic literature research was conducted, according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, to identify human trials, with a minimum sample size of 10 patients, comparing tooth-implant to freestanding implant supported fixed partial prostheses. Four groups of meta-analyses were performed based on the patients treated with toothimplant vs freestanding implant-supported fixed partial prostheses: abutment failures, biological and mechanical complications, prosthesis failures, and prosthetic (technical) complications.
RESULTS
The search yielded 749 records, after removal of duplicates. Based on the title assessment, the abstracts reading and the full-texts evaluation, 8 articles, published between 1999 and 2013, fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The studies included were: 4 controlled clinical trials, 2 prospective and 2 retrospective cohort studies. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference between tooth-implant and implant-implant supported fixed in the number of abutment (implant or tooth) failures, biological complications, prosthesis lost, and prosthetic complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of the present systematic review, although the freestanding implant supported fixed partial prosthesis remains the first choice, joining teeth and implants to support fixed prosthesis in partially edentulous patients becomes a valid alternative with an acceptable success rate.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Denture, Partial, Fixed; Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32938874
DOI: 10.2186/jpr.JPOR_2019_494 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Oct 2021To investigate the impact of timing of implant placement and loading on implant survival and biological outcomes of multiple-unit implant-supported fixed dental... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Does the timing of implant placement and loading influence biological outcomes of implant-supported multiple-unit fixed dental prosthesis-A systematic review with meta-analyses.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the impact of timing of implant placement and loading on implant survival and biological outcomes of multiple-unit implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis (FDPs).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A literature search was performed by three independent reviewers for studies reporting on ≥10 patients with FPDs supported by ≥two implants over ≥3 years of follow-up. Data were analyzed on implant survival and biological complications as primary outcomes and biological events, including changes in peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL), probing depth, soft-tissue level, and health condition as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
7002 titles were identified, 360 full-texts were screened, and 14 studies were included. These comprised 6 randomized controlled studies (RCTs), 5 cohort studies, and 3 case series with identifiable implant placement and loading protocols in five of 09 possible combinations. All groups but one (IPIL) showed implant survival rates >90%. A meta-analysis based on 3 RCTs found no differences in survival rate between DPIL and DPDL (p = .227).
CONCLUSIONS
High survival rates for all studied implant placement and loading combinations were shown for FPDs over ≥3 years of follow-up. When a delayed implant placement protocol is applied, immediate or delayed loading demonstrated similar survival rates. The heterogeneity of the data did not allow to draw any further conclusions on the occurrence of biological complications related to timing of implant placement/loading.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading
PubMed: 34642990
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13860 -
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 -
The Bone & Joint Journal Jan 2017We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthroplasty. (Review)
Review
AIMS
We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We initially identified 1305 studies, and 406 were found to be duplicates. After exclusion criteria were applied, seven studies were included. Outcomes extracted included pre- and post-operative pain visual analogue scores, range of movement (ROM), strength of pinch and grip, satisfaction and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Clinical and radiological complications were recorded. The results are presented in three groups based on the design of the arthroplasty and the aetiology (pyrocarbon-osteoarthritis (pyro-OA), pyrocarbon-inflammatory arthritis (pyro-IA), metal-on-polyethylene (MoP)).
RESULTS
Results show that pyrocarbon implants provide an 85% reduction in pain, 144% increase of pinch grip and 13° improvements in ROM for both OA and IA combined. Patients receiving MoP arthroplasties had a reduction in pinch strength. Satisfaction rates were 91% and 92% for pyrocarbon-OA and pyrocarbon-IA groups, respectively. There were nine failures in 87 joints (10.3%) over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years (1.0 to 14.3) for pyro-OA. There were 18 failures in 149 joints (12.1%) over a mean period of 6.6 years (1.0 to 16.0) for pyro-IA. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited presentation of data.
CONCLUSION
We would recommend prospective data collection for small joint arthroplasties of the hand consisting of PROMs that would allow clinicians to come to stronger conclusions about the impact on function of replacing the MCPJs. A national joint registry may be the best way to achieve this. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:100-6.
Topics: Arthroplasty; Carbon; Hand Strength; Humans; Metacarpophalangeal Joint; Musculoskeletal Pain; Osteoarthritis; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Prostheses and Implants; Prosthesis Failure; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28053264
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.37237 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2017Recognition of some of the limitations of titanium plates and screws used for the fixation of bones has led to the development of plates manufactured from bioresorbable... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Recognition of some of the limitations of titanium plates and screws used for the fixation of bones has led to the development of plates manufactured from bioresorbable materials. Whilst resorbable plates appear to offer clinical advantages over metal plates in orthognathic surgery, concerns remain about the stability of fixation and the length of time required for their degradation and the possibility of foreign body reactions. This review compares the use of titanium versus bioresorbable plates in orthognathic surgery and is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of bioresorbable fixation systems with titanium systems used during orthognathic surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 20 January 2017); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 20 January 2017); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 20 January 2017); and Embase Ovid (1980 to 20 January 2017). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov; searched 20 January 2017), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (searched 20 January 2017) for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing bioresorbable versus titanium fixation systems used for orthognathic surgery in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of the electronic searches, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We resolved disagreement by discussion. Clinical heterogeneity between the included trials precluded pooling of data, and only a descriptive summary is presented.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included two trials, involving 103 participants, one comparing titanium with resorbable plates and screws and the other titanium with resorbable screws. Both studies were at high risk of bias and provided very limited data for the primary outcomes of this review. All participants in one trial suffered mild to moderate postoperative discomfort with no statistically significant difference between the two plating groups at different follow-up times. Mean scores of patient satisfaction were 7.43 to 8.63 (range 0 to 10) with no statistically significant difference between the two groups throughout follow-up. Adverse effects reported in one study were two plate exposures in each group occurring between the third and ninth months. Plate exposures occurred mainly in the posterior maxillary region, except for one titanium plate exposure in the mandibular premolar region. Known causes of infection were associated with loosened screws and wound dehiscence with no statistically significant difference in the infection rate between titanium (3/196), and resorbable (3/165) plates.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We do not have sufficient evidence to determine if titanium plates or resorbable plates are superior for fixation of bones after orthognathic surgery. This review provides insufficient evidence to show any difference in postoperative pain and discomfort, level of patient satisfaction, plate exposure or infection for plate and screw fixation using either titanium or resorbable materials.
Topics: Absorbable Implants; Bone Plates; Bone Screws; Device Removal; Humans; Internal Fixators; Mandible; Maxilla; Osteotomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Titanium
PubMed: 28977689
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006204.pub3 -
Journal of Neuroengineering and... Nov 2023The prosthetic socket is a key component that influences prosthesis satisfaction, with a poorly fitting prosthetic socket linked to prosthesis abandonment and reduced... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The prosthetic socket is a key component that influences prosthesis satisfaction, with a poorly fitting prosthetic socket linked to prosthesis abandonment and reduced community participation. This paper reviews adjustable socket designs, as they have the potential to improve prosthetic fit and comfort through accommodating residual limb volume fluctuations and alleviating undue socket pressure.
METHODS
Systematic literature and patent searches were conducted across multiple databases to identify articles and patents that discussed adjustable prosthetic sockets. The patents were used to find companies, organisations, and institutions who currently sell adjustable sockets or who are developing devices.
RESULTS
50 literature articles and 63 patents were identified for inclusion, representing 35 different designs used in literature and 16 commercially available products. Adjustable sockets are becoming more prevalent with 73% of publications (literature, patents, and news) occurring within the last ten years. Two key design characteristics were identified: principle of adjustability (inflatable bladders, moveable panels, circumferential adjustment, variable length), and surface form (conformable, rigid multi-DOF, and rigid single DOF). Inflatable bladders contributed to 40% of literature used designs with only one identified commercially available design (n = 16) using this approach. Whereas circumferential adjustment designs covered 75% of identified industry designs compared to only 36% of literature devices. Clinical studies were generally small in size and only 17.6% of them assessed a commercially available socket.
DISCUSSION
There are clear differences in the design focus taken by industry and researchers, with justification for choice of design and range of adjustment often being unclear. Whilst comfort is often reported as improved with an adjustable socket, the rationale behind this is not often discussed, and small study sizes reduce the outcome viability. Many adjustable sockets lack appropriate safety features to limit over or under tightening, which may present a risk of tissue damage or provide inadequate coupling, affecting function and satisfaction. Furthermore, the relationship between design and comfort or function are rarely investigated and remain a significant gap in the literature. Finally, this review highlights the need for improved collaboration between academia and industry, with a strong disconnect observed between commercial devices and published research studies.
Topics: Humans; Prosthesis Design; Research Design; Amputation Stumps; Artificial Limbs; Extremities
PubMed: 37926807
DOI: 10.1186/s12984-023-01270-0 -
Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the clinical survival of axial and tilted implants in atrophic edentulous maxilla after three years of immediate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the clinical survival of axial and tilted implants in atrophic edentulous maxilla after three years of immediate loading and also the corresponding marginal bone loss.
SETTING AND DESIGN
This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The relevant studies were retrieved from MEDLINE(PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Direct, Google Scholar databases. The search was limited to studies published in the English language with no date restrictions. A further hand search was conducted on individual journals and reference lists of studies. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed by using the Evidence Project risk of bias tool.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED
Statistical meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. The assessment for the level of evidence was done using GRADEpro software.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were finalised. All were included in the meta-analysis for implant survival, while only seven studies were included in the meta-analysis of marginal bone loss. After three years, the meta-analysis results for implant survival showed no statistical difference between axial and tilted implants, with the forest plot neither favouring axial nor tilted implants (RR = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98-1.01); P-value = 0.59). After three years, the meta-analysis results for marginal bone showed no statistical difference between axial and tilted implants, with the forest plot neither favouring axial nor tilted implants (MD = -0.02; 95% CI; -0.09-0.06; P-value = 0.69).
CONCLUSION
In the immediately loaded rehabilitation of completely edentulous atrophic maxillae, tilting of implants did not induce any significant alteration in their survival and their corresponding marginal bone loss levels compared to conventionally placed axial implants even after three years of function.
Topics: Alveolar Bone Loss; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Maxilla; Mouth, Edentulous; Prostheses and Implants
PubMed: 34380808
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_79_21 -
The Bone & Joint Journal Apr 2017The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Vancouver type B2 and B3 fractures by performing a systematic review of the methods of surgical treatment which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Vancouver type B2 and B3 fractures by performing a systematic review of the methods of surgical treatment which have been reported.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For inclusion, studies required a minimum of ten patients with a Vancouver type B2 and/or ten patients with a Vancouver type B3 fracture, a minimum mean follow-up of two years and outcomes which were matched to the type of fracture. Studies were also required to report the rate of re-operation as an outcome measure. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database.
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies were included based on the eligibility criteria, including 343 B2 fractures and 167 B3 fractures. The mean follow-up ranged from 32 months to 74 months. Of 343 Vancouver B2 fractures, the treatment in 298 (86.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and 45 (12.6%) were treated with internal fixation alone. A total of 37 patients (12.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and six (13.3%) treated by internal fixation only underwent further re-operation. Of 167 Vancouver B3 fractures, the treatment in 160 (95.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and eight (4.8%) were treated with internal fixation without revision. A total of 23 patients (14.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and two (28.6%) treated only with internal fixation required re-operation.
CONCLUSION
A significant proportion, particularly of B2 fractures, were treated without revision of the stem. These were associated with a higher rate of re-operation. The treatment of B3 fractures without revision of the stem resulted in a high rate of re-operation. This demonstrates the importance of careful evaluation and accurate characterisation of the fracture at the time of presentation to ensure the correct management. There is a need for improvement in the reporting of data in case series recording the outcome of the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures. We have suggested a minimum dataset to improve the quality of data in studies dealing with these fractures. Cite this article: 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):17-25.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Femoral Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Periprosthetic Fractures; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure; Reoperation
PubMed: 28363890
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B4.BJJ-2016-1311.R1 -
Scientific Reports Feb 2016Juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JAA) account for approximately 15% of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) and chimney endovascular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JAA) account for approximately 15% of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) and chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (CH-EVAR) are both effective methods to treat JAAs, but the comparative effectiveness of these treatment modalities is unclear. We searched the PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify English language articles published between January 2005 and September 2013 on management of JAA with fenestrated and chimney techniques to conduct a systematic review to compare outcomes of patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysm (JAA) treated with the two techniques. We compared nine F-EVAR cohort studies including 542 JAA patients and 8 CH-EVAR cohorts with 158 JAA patients regarding techniques success rates, 30-day mortality, late mortality, endoleak events and secondary intervention rates. The results of this systematic review indicate that both fenestrated and chimney techniques are attractive options for JAAs treatment with encouraging early and mid-term outcomes.
Topics: Aged; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis; Cohort Studies; Demography; Endovascular Procedures; Female; Humans; Kidney; Male; Postoperative Care; Statistics as Topic; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26869488
DOI: 10.1038/srep20497