The Comparison of Survival Rates between Narrow Diameter Implants and Standard Diameter Implants: An Updated Meta-analysis.

Background: One of the key objectives is to update knowledge in order to develop treatment and care recommendations based on research findings. The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to compare the survival rate of narrow dental implants (NDI) with standard dental implants (SDI). Methods: The international databases targeted for conducting a broad search included PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Sciences, and Embase (Elsevier), which were searched to retrieve articles from January 1, 2000, to the end of July 2022. After the search, studies were screened based on the title, abstract, and full text, and finally, information extraction and quality assessment of the articles were performed based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale checklist. All analyzes were conducted in STATA software Version 17. Results: After the screening, 8 retrospective and prospective cohort studies remained in the research for analysis. The outcomes demonstrated that the probability of healthy teeth in the 2 groups of NDI and SDI was not substantially different at least a year after implantation, and the risk ratio of tooth loss in the NDI group was comparable to that of the SDI group (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98, 1.02; I2: 28.37 %; P = 0.252). In addition, the survival rates in the 2 groups were also measured using meta-analysis and the results showed the survival rates in the 2 groups of NDI and SDI were almost equal. In the SDI group, the survival rate was equal to 94% (95% CI, 90%-98%), and in the NDI group, it was equal to 94% (95% CI, 92%- 98%). Conclusion: Based on the results of the present meta-analysis, the survival rates in the both NDI and SDI groups were almost equal.

Histological evaluation of the healing process of autografted mandibular bone defects in rats under treatment with zoledronate.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the healing process of autografted mandibular bone defects in rats treated with zoledronate (ZOL). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 180 Wistar rats were divided into four groups: group L received intravenous infusion of two doses of 0.06 mg/kg ZOL, nine weeks apart; group H received 0.06 mg/kg ZOL, while groups C and NC received normal saline at three-week intervals for nine weeks. Three weeks following the last infusion, a unilateral mandibular bone defect (5 mm) was created. Except in the NC group, all defects were repaired with autologous iliac bone graft. Fifteen animals from each group were sacrificed on postoperative Day 20, Day 40, and Day 60. Graft healing was scored using a histological grading system (ranging from 1 to 6). RESULTS: Histological evaluations performed on postoperative Day 60 showed that the mandibular defects were mainly repaired with fibrous tissue in the NC and H groups (93.00% ± 7.51% and 82.67% ± 13.08%, respectively) and with bone in the C and L groups (75.33% ± 14.20% and 92.67% ± 8.84%, respectively). The percentage of fibrous tissue and bone as well as the healing score of the NC and H groups were significantly different (P = 0.001) from those of the C and L groups. However, these were not different between neither the NC and H groups nor the C and L groups. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of the present study the hypothesis can be established that there also might be a dose-dependent effect of ZOL on the healing of bone grafts in humans. This hypothesis has to be verified or rejected in clinical trials.

Comparison of Intra-Socket Bupivacaine Administration Versus Oral Mefenamic Acid Capsule for Postoperative Pain Management Following Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars.

PURPOSE: Surgical removal of impacted third molar teeth is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Postoperative pain is a common and predictable occurrence after maxillofacial surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized double-blind clinical trial was conducted with a crossover design in which each patient served as his or her own control. Forty-six patients with similar bilateral impacted lower third molars were selected. In each patient, the intervention and control sides of the mandible were randomly determined at the end of surgery. If the removed tooth was in the intervention side, then the patient would receive bupivacaine and a placebo of mefenamic acid. If the impacted tooth was in the control side, then the patient would receive a mefenamic acid capsule and a placebo of bupivacaine. Pain severity was assessed using a visual analog scale. Data were analyzed using paired-sample t test and a P value less than .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of 46 participants originally recruited, 43 were included in the present study. The mean postoperative pain score in patients who received bupivacaine was increased to a maximum 4 hours, with marked improvements after this time. The mean intensity of pain after administration of bupivacaine was lower than that of mefenamic acid capsules at different time points. Statistical analysis showed a relevant difference in pain intensity between the 2 study groups. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study showed that local administration of bupivacaine relieves postoperative pain after surgical removal of impacted third molar teeth.