Literature DB >> 27339242

The all-on-four concept may be a viable treatment option for edentulous rehabilitation.

Kelvin I Afrashtehfar1.   

Abstract

Data sourcesMedline, the Cochrane Library, Google and hand-searches of systematic reviews and bibliographies from related journals in English and German up to August 2012.Study selectionThree reviewers independently searched for clinical trials that assessed the success rates of placing two anterior and two posterior tilted dental implants in humans either in the maxilla or mandible according to the all-on-four treatment concept. Inclusion limited studies with a minimum follow-up period of one year.Data extraction and synthesisThe primary outcome measure was the failure rate of implants. The secondary outcomes were prosthesis failure and marginal bone loss/bone level changes assessed through radiological examination. Failure rate was used to calculate standard deviations (SDs) of implants, whereas the mean success rate was used for dental implants and prostheses. Evaluation and quality assessment of articles and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. These reviewers estimated risk of bias by assessing the trial quality using a criteria form focused on the trial design, specification of inclusion/exclusion criteria, performance of surgery, outcome measure provided, radiographic examination of marginal bone level change as well as its evaluation and completeness of follow-up. Outcome measures were based on weighted means using a variance components analysis.ResultsThirteen studies, including 4,804 dental implants (2,000 maxilla and 2,804 mandible) placed in 1,201 jaws met the inclusion criteria. Nine were prospective trials, three retrospective studies and one longitudinal trial. All studies except one were considered to be at high risk of bias. Seventy-four (37 axially, 37 tilted) dental implants failed, with most failures (74%) within the first 12 months. Fifty-seven out of 1,201 prostheses failed but were repairable. The major prosthetic complication was the fracture of the all-acrylic prostheses. At 36 months the mean cumulative survival rates for implants and prostheses were 99.0 ± 1.0% (SD) and 99.9 ± 0.3% (SD), respectively with an average bone loss of 1.3 ± 0.4 mm (SD). There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical outcomes between maxillary versus mandibular arches and axially versus tilted placed implants.ConclusionsThe available evidence shows a promising short-term prognosis for the all-on-four treatment concept. However the evidence is limited by the quality of the available studies and the paucity of clinical trials of greater than five years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27339242     DOI: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evid Based Dent        ISSN: 1462-0049


  7 in total

Review 1.  The McGill consensus statement on overdentures.

Authors: 
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 1.677

Review 2.  Tilted implants for the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws: a systematic review.

Authors:  Massimo Del Fabbro; Chiara M Bellini; Davide Romeo; Luca Francetti
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 3.932

3.  A retrospective multicenter evaluation of osseointegrated implants supporting overdentures.

Authors:  B Engquist; T Bergendal; T Kallus; U Linden
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 4.  Tilted implants in the immediate loading rehabilitation of the maxilla: a systematic review.

Authors:  M Menini; A Signori; T Tealdo; M Bevilacqua; F Pera; G Ravera; P Pera
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 6.116

Review 5.  What is the optimal number of implants for fixed reconstructions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Guido Heydecke; Marcel Zwahlen; Ailsa Nicol; Davide Nisand; Michael Payer; Frank Renouard; Philipp Grohmann; Sven Mühlemann; Tim Joda
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 5.977

6.  Implant therapy to improve quality of life.

Authors:  Wael Att; Christian Stappert
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.677

7.  Oral rehabilitation with tilted dental implants: a metaanalysis.

Authors:  Javier Ata-Ali; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Eugenia Candel-Marti; Maria Peñarrocha-Diago
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2012-07-01
  7 in total
  3 in total

1.  Mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses supported by three-dental-implants: A protocol of an overview of reviews.

Authors:  Kelvin I Afrashtehfar; Rosalin A Moawad; Afaf W F-Eddin; Hom-Lay Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Full Arch Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation in Patients with Type I Diabetes Mellitus: Retrospective Clinical Study with 10 Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Bianca D'Orto; Elisabetta Polizzi; Matteo Nagni; Giulia Tetè; Paolo Capparè
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-09-17       Impact factor: 4.614

Review 3.  From dental science to clinical practice: Knowledge translation and evidence-based dentistry principles.

Authors:  Kelvin I Afrashtehfar; Mansour K Assery
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2017-03-15
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.