Number of implants placed for complete‐arch fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

If you need an accessible version of this item, please email your request to digschol@iu.edu so that they may create one and provide it to you.
Date
2018-10
Language
English
Embargo Lift Date
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Wiley
Abstract

Objectives The main purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate outcomes related to the number of implants utilized to support complete‐arch fixed prostheses, both for the maxilla and the mandible.

Materials and methods This review followed the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA). A focused question using the PICO format was developed, questioning whether “In patients with an implant supported fixed complete dental prosthesis, do implant and prosthetic survival outcomes differ between five or more compared to fewer than five supporting implants?”. A comprehensive search of the literature was formulated and performed electronically and by hand search. Two independent reviewers selected the papers and tabulated results. Primary outcomes analyzed were implant and prosthesis survival. Implant distribution, loading, and type of retention were observed as secondary outcomes, as they relate to the number of implants. A meta‐analysis was performed to compare results for studies by number of implants.

Results The search strategy identified 1,579 abstracts for initial review. Based on evaluation of the abstracts, 359 articles were identified for full‐text evaluation. From these, 93 were selected and included in this review, being nine RCTs, 42 prospective and 42 retrospective. Of the 93 selected studies, 28 reported number of implants for the maxilla, 46 for the mandible, and 19 for both maxilla and mandible. The most reported number of implants for the “fewer than five” group is 4 for the maxilla, and 3 and 4 for the mandible, whereas for the “five or more” implants group, the most reported number of implants was 6 for the maxilla and 5 for the mandible. No significant differences in the primary outcomes analyzed were identified when fewer than five implants per arch were compared with five or more implants per arch (p > 0.05), in a follow‐up time ranging from 1 to 15 years (median of 8 years).

Conclusions Evidence from this systematic review and meta‐analysis suggests that the use of fewer than five implants per arch, when compared to five or more implants per arch, to support a fixed prosthesis of the completely edentulous maxilla or mandible, present similar survival rates, with no statistical significant difference at a p < 0.05 and a confidence interval of 95%.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
Polido, W. D., Aghaloo, T., Emmett, T. W., Taylor, T. D., & Morton, D. (2018). Number of implants placed for complete-arch fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29(S16), 154–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13312
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Source
Publisher
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Final published version
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}