Literature DB >> 18437792

In patients requiring single-tooth replacement, what are the outcomes of implant- as compared to tooth-supported restorations?

Thomas J Salinas1, Steven E Eckert.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The study provides a systematic review of the literature to determine the long-term survival characteristics of single implant-supported crowns and fixed partial dentures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Collaboration databases was conducted to identify articles that compared survival and success of fixed partial dentures and single implant-supported crowns. In addition to comparative cohort studies, articles that pertained specifically to single implant-supported crowns or fixed partial dentures were included in this review. Inclusion criteria for implant and fixed partial denture articles included a minimum 2-year study, primary publication in the English language, a minimum of 12 implants, implants designed to osseointegrate, and inclusion of data regarding implant and prosthetic performance. Data were analyzed using cumulative proportions of survival and success for both prosthetic types and for individual implants. Wilson score method was used to establish 95% confidence intervals for each population. The chi-square test for homogeneity was performed.
RESULTS: The literature search failed to identify any articles that directly compared survival or success of single implant-supported restorations with fixed partial dentures. Following the search criteria, and independent analysis by reviewers, 51 articles were identified in the implant literature (agreement, 95.42%; kappa coefficient, 0.8976), and 41 were identified in the fixed partial denture literature (agreement, 90.97%; kappa coefficient, 0.7524). Pooled success of single-implant restorations at 60 months was 95.1% (CI: 92.2%-98.0%), while fixed partial dentures of all designs exhibited an 84.0% success rate (CI: 79.1%-88.9%).
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review of the scientific literature failed to demonstrate any direct comparative studies assessing clinical performance of single implant-supported crowns and tooth-supported fixed partial dentures. The analysis suggested differences at 60 months between survival of implant-supported single crowns and natural tooth-supported fixed prostheses when resin-bonded and conventionally retained fixed prostheses were grouped. This difference disappeared when implant-supported single crowns were compared with conventionally retained fixed partial dentures at 60 months. For other time periods, direct comparative data were unavailable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18437792

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  8 in total

1.  Nonsurgical and nonprosthetic camouflage treatment of skeletal Class II open bite with bilaterally missing lower first molars.

Authors:  Tung Nguyen; Eui Seon Baek; Soonshin Hwang; Kyung-Ho Kim; Chooryung J Chung
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-08-20       Impact factor: 2.079

2.  Are implants more reliable than severely compromised endodontically treated teeth as abutments for zirconia-based FPDs? : In vitro results of long-term preclinical load simulation.

Authors:  M Naumann; C Hohmann; A Happe; F Beuer; R Frankenberger; R Seemann; M Rosentritt
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-10-27       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Relationship between sponsorship and failure rate of dental implants: a systematic approach.

Authors:  Antoine Popelut; Fabien Valet; Olivier Fromentin; Aurélie Thomas; Philippe Bouchard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  A new dimension in endo surgery: Micro endo surgery.

Authors:  Gabriele Edoardo Pecora; Camilla Nicole Pecora
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb

5.  A randomized, 12-month controlled trial to evaluate non-inferiority of early compared to conventional loading of modSLA implants in single tooth gaps.

Authors:  Michel Dard; Makoto Shiota; Minoru Sanda; Yasutomo Yajima; Hideshi Sekine; Shohei Kasugai
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2016-04-04

6.  Clinical outcomes of single implant supported crowns versus 3-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in Dubai Health Authority: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Sara Hussain Alhammadi; Girvan Burnside; Alexander Milosevic
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.757

7.  The management of an endodontically abscessed tooth: patient health state utility, decision-tree and economic analysis.

Authors:  Ben Balevi; Sasha Shepperd
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2007-12-06       Impact factor: 2.757

8.  Implant-to-root dimensions projected by panoramic radiographs inthe maxillary canine-premolar region: implications for dental implant treatment.

Authors:  Annika Bertram; Alexander W Eckert; Rüdiger Emshoff
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 1.930

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.