Show simple item record

A systematic review on marginal bone loss around short dental implants (<10 mm) for implant‐supported fixed prostheses

dc.contributor.authorMonje, Albertoen_US
dc.contributor.authorSuarez, Fernandoen_US
dc.contributor.authorGalindo‐moreno, Pabloen_US
dc.contributor.authorGarcía‐nogales, Agustínen_US
dc.contributor.authorFu, Jia‐huien_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Hom‐layen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-10-07T16:09:37Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHSen_US
dc.date.available2014-10-07T16:09:37Z
dc.date.issued2014-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationMonje, Alberto; Suarez, Fernando; Galindo‐moreno, Pablo ; García‐nogales, Agustín ; Fu, Jia‐hui ; Wang, Hom‐lay (2014). "A systematic review on marginal bone loss around short dental implants (<10 mm) for implantâ supported fixed prostheses." Clinical Oral Implants Research 25(10): 1119-1124.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-0501en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/108654
dc.description.abstractPurpose This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of implant length on peri‐implant marginal bone loss ( MBL ) and its associated influencing factors. Material and methods An electronic search of the PubMed and MEDLINE databases for relevant studies published in English from November 2006 to July 2012 was performed by one examiner ( AM ). Selected studies were randomized clinical trials, human experimental clinical trials or prospective studies (e.g., cohort as well as case series) with a clear aim of investigating marginal bone loss of short dental implants (<10 mm) supporting fixed prostheses. A random‐effect meta‐regression model was used to determine the relationship between the effect size mean MBL and the covariate “implant length.” Additionally, a subgroup analysis, by means of a random‐effect one‐way ANOVA model, comparing mean MBL values at different levels of each factor (“type of connection” and “type of prostheses”) was also performed. Results The meta‐regression of mean MBL on the moderator “implant length” was found to be insignificant ( P  = 0.633). Therefore, it could not be concluded that implant length had an effect on peri‐implant MBL . In addition, standardized differences in mean MBL on the subgroups short (<10 mm) and standard (≥10 mm) implants, as determined by the meta‐analysis (random‐effect model), were found to be statistically insignificant ( P  = 0.222). Conclusions Within limitations of the present systematic review, it could be concluded that short dental implants (<10 mm) had similar peri‐implant MBL as standard implants (≥10 mm) for implant‐supported fixed prostheses.en_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.subject.otherLongitudinal Studiesen_US
dc.subject.otherAlveolar Bone Lossen_US
dc.subject.otherDental Implants, Review and Evidence‐Based Dentistryen_US
dc.titleA systematic review on marginal bone loss around short dental implants (<10 mm) for implant‐supported fixed prosthesesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108654/1/clr12236.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/clr.12236en_US
dc.identifier.sourceClinical Oral Implants Researchen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePessoa, R.S., Muraru, L., Junior, E.M., Vaz, L.G., Sloten, J.V., Duyck, J. & Jaecques, S.V. ( 2010 ) Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants – CT‐based nonlinear, three‐dimensional finite element analysis. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 12: 219 – 234.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIsidor, F. ( 1996 ) Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clinical Oral Implants Research 7: 143 – 152.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIsidor, F. ( 2006 ) Influence of forces on peri‐implant bone. Clinical Oral Implants Research 17 ( Suppl. 2 ): 8 – 18.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim, Y., Oh, T.J., Misch, C.E. & Wang, H.L. ( 2005 ) Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale. Clinical Oral Implants Research 16: 26 – 35.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaurell, L. & Lundgren, D. ( 2011 ) Marginal bone level changes at dental implants after 5 years in function: a meta‐analysis. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 13: 19 – 28.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLum, L.B. ( 1991 ) A biomechanical rationale for the use of short implants. The Journal of Oral Implantology 17: 126 – 131.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMaeda, Y., Satoh, T. & Sogo, M. ( 2006 ) In vitro differences of stress concentrations for internal and external hex implant‐abutment connections: a short communication. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 33: 75 – 78.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje, A., Chan, H.L., Fu, J.H., Suarez, F., Galindo‐Moreno, P. & Wang, H.L. ( 2013a ) Are short dental implants (<10 mm) effective? A meta‐analysis on prospective clinical trials. Journal of Periodontology 84: 895 ‐ 904.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonje, A., Fu, J.H., Chan, H.L., Suarez, F., Galindo‐Moreno, P., Catena, A. & Wang, H.L. ( 2013b ) Do implant length and width matter for short dental implants (6–9 mm)? A meta‐analysis of prospective studies. Journal of Periodontology. doi: 10.1902/jop.2013.120745.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorton, M.R. ( 1999 ) Assessment of cold welding properties of the internal conical interface of two commercially available implant systems. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 81: 159 – 166.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePenarrocha‐Diago, M.A., Flichy‐Fernandez, A.J., Alonso‐Gonzalez, R., Penarrocha‐Oltra, D., Balaguer‐Martinez, J. & Penarrocha‐Diago, M. ( 2012 ) Influence of implant neck design and implant‐abutment connection type on peri‐implant health. Radiological study. Clinical Oral Implants Research doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2012.02562.x.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePommer, B., Frantal, S., Willer, J., Posch, M., Watzek, G. & Tepper, G. ( 2011 ) Impact of dental implant length on early failure rates: a meta‐analysis of observational studies. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 38: 856 – 863.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQian, L., Todo, M., Matsushita, Y. & Koyano, K. ( 2009 ) Effects of implant diameter, insertion depth, and loading angle on stress/strain fields in implant/jawbone systems: finite element analysis. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 24: 877 – 886.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQian, J., Wennerberg, A. & Albrektsson, T. ( 2012 ) Reasons for marginal bone loss around oral implants. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 14: 792 – 807.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRenouard, F. & Nisand, D. ( 2006 ) Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Clinical Oral Implants Research 17 ( Suppl. 2 ): 35 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRieger, M.R., Mayberry, M. & Brose, M.O. ( 1990 ) Finite element analysis of six endosseous implants. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 63: 671 – 676.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRomeo, E., Ghisolfi, M., Rozza, R., Chiapasco, M. & Lops, D. ( 2006 ) Short (8‐mm) dental implants in the rehabilitation of partial and complete edentulism: a 3‐ to 14‐year longitudinal study. The International Journal of Prosthodontics 19: 586 – 592.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRossi, F., Ricci, E., Marchetti, C., Lang, N.P. & Botticelli, D. ( 2010 ) Early loading of single crowns supported by 6‐mm‐long implants with a moderately rough surface: a prospective 2‐year follow‐up cohort study. Clinical Oral Implants Research 21: 937 – 943.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStang, A. ( 2010 ) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta‐analyses. European Journal of Epidemiology 25: 603 – 605.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSun, H.L., Huang, C., Wu, Y.R. & Shi, B. ( 2011 ) Failure rates of short (≤10 mm) dental implants and factors influencing their failure: a systematic review. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 26: 816 – 825.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTelleman, G., Meijer, H.J., Vissink, A. & Raghoebar, G.M. ( 2011a ) Short implants with a nanometer‐sized CaP surface provided with either a platform‐switched or platform‐matched abutment connection in the posterior region: a randomized clinical trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research 38: 667 – 676.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTelleman, G., Raghoebar, G.M., Vissink, A., den Hartog, L., Huddleston Slater, J.J. & Meijer, H.J. ( 2011b ) A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 38: 667 – 676.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYilmaz, B., Seidt, J.D., McGlumphy, E.A. & Clelland, N.L. ( 2011 ) Comparison of strains for splinted and nonsplinted screw‐retained prostheses on short implants. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 26: 1176 – 1182.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlbrektsson, T., Jansson, T. & Lekholm, U. ( 1986 ) Osseointegrated dental implants. Dental Clinics of North America 30: 151 – 174.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnnibali, S., Cristalli, M.P., Dell'Aquila, D., Bignozzi, I., La Monaca, G. & Pilloni, A. ( 2012 ) Short dental implants: a systematic review. Journal of Dental Research 91: 25 – 32.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAtieh, M.A., Ibrahim, H.M. & Atieh, A.H. ( 2010 ) Platform switching for marginal bone preservation around dental implants: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Periodontology 81: 1350 – 1366.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlanes, R.J. ( 2009 ) To what extent does the crown‐implant ratio affect the survival and complications of implant‐supported reconstructions? A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 20 ( Suppl. 4 ): 67 – 72.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBorenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P.T. & Rothstein, H.R. ( 2009 ) Introduction to Meta‐Analysis, 49 – 55. Chichester: Wiley.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCanullo, L., Bignozzi, I., Cocchetto, R., Cristalli, M.P. & Iannello, G. ( 2010 ) Immediate positioning of a definitive abutment versus repeated abutment replacements in post‐extractive implants: 3‐year follow‐up of a randomised multicentre clinical trial. European Journal of Oral Implantology 3: 285 – 296.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCardaropoli, G., Lekholm, U. & Wennstrom, J.L. ( 2006 ) Tissue alterations at implant‐supported single‐tooth replacements: a 1‐year prospective clinical study. Clinical Oral Implants Research 17: 165 – 171.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChou, H.Y., Muftu, S. & Bozkaya, D. ( 2010 ) Combined effects of implant insertion depth and alveolar bone quality on periimplant bone strain induced by a wide‐diameter, short implant and a narrow‐diameter, long implant. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 104: 293 – 300.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClelland, N.L., Gilat, A., McGlumphy, E.A. & Brantley, W.A. ( 1993 ) A photoelastic and strain gauge analysis of angled abutments for an implant system. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 8: 541 – 548.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEsposito, M., Pellegrino, G., Pistilli, R. & Felice, P. ( 2011 ) Rehabilitation of posterior atrophic edentulous jaws: prostheses supported by 5 mm short implants or by longer implants in augmented bone? One‐year results from a pilot randomised clinical trial. European Journal of Oral Implantology 4: 21 – 30.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalindo‐Moreno, P., Fauri, M., Avila‐Ortiz, G., Fernandez‐Barbero, J.E., Cabrera‐Leon, A. & Sanchez‐Fernandez, E. ( 2005 ) Influence of alcohol and tobacco habits on peri‐implant marginal bone loss: a prospective study. Clinical Oral Implants Research 16: 579 – 586.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGulje, F., Abrahamsson, I., Chen, S., Stanford, C., Zadeh, H. & Palmer, R. ( 2012 ) Implants of 6 mm vs. 11 mm lengths in the posterior maxilla and mandible: a 1‐year multicenter randomized controlled trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research doi: 10.1111/clr.12001.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHagi, D., Deporter, D.A., Pilliar, R.M. & Arenovich, T. ( 2004 ) A targeted review of study outcomes with short (< or = 7 mm) endosseous dental implants placed in partially edentulous patients. Journal of Periodontology 75: 798 – 804.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHasan, I., Heinemann, F., Aitlahrach, M. & Bourauel, C. ( 2010 ) Biomechanical finite element analysis of small diameter and short dental implant. Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical Engineering 55: 341 – 350.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.