PURPOSE: Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) is used to measure oral implant stability. There is controversy with regard to its accuracy in predicting both implant stability and osseointegration. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the prognostic accuracy of RFA in predicting implant failure following immediate loading protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the United Kingdom National Research Register, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and the Conference Proceedings Citations Index were searched to select studies that used RFA in assessing implant stability prior to immediate loading. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of RFA in the selected studies were evaluated using a random effects model. The summary receiver operating characteristic was constructed to summarize the overall test performance. RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 2,236 immediately loaded implants were identified. The sensitivity of RFA in predicting failure of immediately loaded implants was 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22 to 0.56), the specificity was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.75), and the diagnostic odds ratio was 2.10 (95% CI: 0.79 to 5.57). The area under the curve was 0.54, suggesting a poor predictive and discriminative ability. CONCLUSION: RFA measurement at the time of implant placement is not sufficiently accurate to determine implant stability and osseointegration during immediate loading protocols.
PURPOSE: Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) is used to measure oral implant stability. There is controversy with regard to its accuracy in predicting both implant stability and osseointegration. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the prognostic accuracy of RFA in predicting implant failure following immediate loading protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the United Kingdom National Research Register, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and the Conference Proceedings Citations Index were searched to select studies that used RFA in assessing implant stability prior to immediate loading. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of RFA in the selected studies were evaluated using a random effects model. The summary receiver operating characteristic was constructed to summarize the overall test performance. RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 2,236 immediately loaded implants were identified. The sensitivity of RFA in predicting failure of immediately loaded implants was 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22 to 0.56), the specificity was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.75), and the diagnostic odds ratio was 2.10 (95% CI: 0.79 to 5.57). The area under the curve was 0.54, suggesting a poor predictive and discriminative ability. CONCLUSION: RFA measurement at the time of implant placement is not sufficiently accurate to determine implant stability and osseointegration during immediate loading protocols.
Authors: T P Beena Kumary; Anuj Singh Parihar; Joe Mathew; K Ipe Sabu; Sindhuja Kota Venkata; Prashant Babaji Journal: J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Date: 2019-02-14