Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Zirconia dental implants; the relationship between design and clinical outcome: A systematic review.
Gul, Abdulaziz; Papia, Evaggelia; Naimi-Akbar, Aron; Ruud, Amund; Vult von Steyern, Per.
Afiliação
  • Gul A; Department of Materials Science and Technology, Division 2, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: abdulaziz.gul@mau.se.
  • Papia E; Department of Materials Science and Technology, Division 2, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Naimi-Akbar A; Health Technology Assessment-Odontology (HTA-O), Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Medicine, Division 2, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Ruud A; Nordic Institute of Dental Materials, NIOM, Oslo, Norway.
  • Vult von Steyern P; Department of Materials Science and Technology, Division 2, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; Nordic Institute of Dental Materials, NIOM, Oslo, Norway.
J Dent ; 143: 104903, 2024 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38437977
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the clinical outcome of different designs of zirconia dental implants. DATA This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA checklist and followed the PICO framework. The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022337228). SOURCES The search was conducted in March 2023 through four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) along with a search of references in the related reviews. Three authors reviewed on title, and abstract level and analysed the risk of bias, and all authors reviewed on a full-text level. STUDY SELECTION Clinical studies excluding case reports for patients treated with different designs of zirconia dental implants were included. From a total of 2728 titles, 71 full-text studies were screened, and 27 studies were included to assess the risk of bias (ROBINS-I tool) and data extraction. After quality assessment, four studies were included, and the remaining 23 excluded studies were narratively described.

RESULT:

The included prospective studies with moderate risk of bias reported success and survival rates of one-piece implants that ranged between 95 and 98.4 % with no difference between different lengths and diameters. The acid-etched roughened surface showed higher clinical outcomes compared to other surface roughness designs.

CONCLUSION:

Promising 5-year clinical outcomes were found for one-piece zirconia implants with no difference between different diameters and lengths. Concerning surface roughness, better outcomes were found when using the acid-etched implant surface. However, due to the limited available studies, further high-quality clinical studies comparing zirconia one-piece and two-piece implants with different diameters, lengths, and surface roughness are needed. CLINICAL

SIGNIFICANCE:

Based on this systematic review, under suitable clinical situations, the one-piece zirconia implants with diameters of 4.0 mm, 4.5 mm, or 5.5 mm and lengths of 8 mm, 10 mm, 12 mm, or 14 mm have similar promising clinical outcomes. Additionally, the acid-etched roughened implant surface may be preferable.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article