BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of several studies validating the use of narrow diameter implants, most of them are based on pure Ti alloys. There is few clinical evidence of the success of TiZr narrow diameter implants (TiZr NDIs) regarding survival rate (SR) and marginal bone loss (MLB). PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to systematically assess SR, as well as MBL of TiZr NDIs compared to commercially pure titanium narrow diameter implants (cpTi NDIs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The search was conducted in Medline/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Embase databases (year 2000 to November 2016). Cohort studies and randomized trials were included. RESULTS: Six clinical studies from the 3453 articles initially identified met the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in SR when TiZr NDIs and cpTi NDIs were compared in the 1-year follow up (P = .5), or when comparing TiZr NDIs placed in posterior and anterior regions. There was no difference between groups regarding 1-year SR: -0.01 (95% CI, -0.05-0.03) and MLB: -0.01 mm (95% CI: -0.14-0.12). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that TiZr NDIs present similar success rates and peri-implant bone resorption to cpTi NDIs.
BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of several studies validating the use of narrow diameter implants, most of them are based on pure Ti alloys. There is few clinical evidence of the success of TiZr narrow diameter implants (TiZr NDIs) regarding survival rate (SR) and marginal bone loss (MLB). PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to systematically assess SR, as well as MBL of TiZr NDIs compared to commercially pure titanium narrow diameter implants (cpTi NDIs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The search was conducted in Medline/PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Embase databases (year 2000 to November 2016). Cohort studies and randomized trials were included. RESULTS: Six clinical studies from the 3453 articles initially identified met the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in SR when TiZr NDIs and cpTi NDIs were compared in the 1-year follow up (P = .5), or when comparing TiZr NDIs placed in posterior and anterior regions. There was no difference between groups regarding 1-year SR: -0.01 (95% CI, -0.05-0.03) and MLB: -0.01 mm (95% CI: -0.14-0.12). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that TiZr NDIs present similar success rates and peri-implant bone resorption to cpTi NDIs.
Authors: Felix Burkhardt; Markus Harlass; Erik Adolfsson; Kirstin Vach; Benedikt Christopher Spies; Ralf-Joachim Kohal Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 3.623