Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30395355›Full record

SynthesisJournal of periodontology2019

Outcome of early dental implant placement versus other dental implant placement protocols: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Seyed Hossein Bassir, Karim El Kholy, Chia-Yu Chen, Kyu Ha Lee, Giuseppe Intini

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of periodontology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Seyed Hossein BassirDivision of Periodontology, Department of Oral Medicine, Infection, and Immunity, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Karim El KholyDivision of Periodontology, Department of Oral Medicine, Infection, and Immunity, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Chia-Yu ChenDivision of Periodontology, Department of Oral Medicine, Infection, and Immunity, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Kyu Ha LeeThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Giuseppe IntiniHarvard Stem Cell Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Funding

Harvard Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001102 · NCATS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI NADLER, LEE MARSHALL · 2013 to 2017
$106.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001102
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy of the early dental implant placement protocol with immediate and delayed dental implant placement protocols.

methodsAn electronic and manual search of literature was made to identify clinical studies comparing early implant placement with immediate or delayed placement. Data from the included studies were pooled and quantitative analyses were performed for the implant outcomes reported as the number of failed implants (primary outcome variable) and for changes in peri-implant marginal bone level, peri-implant probing depth, and peri-implant soft tissue level (secondary outcome variables).

resultsTwelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Significant difference in risk of implant failure was found neither between the early and immediate placement protocols (risk difference = -0.018; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.06, 0.025; P = 0.416) nor between early and delayed placement protocols (risk difference = -0.008; 95% CI = -0.044, 0.028; P = 0.670). Pooled data of changes in peri-implant marginal bone level demonstrated significantly less marginal bone loss for implants placed using the early placement protocol compared with those placed in fresh extraction sockets (P = 0.001; weighted mean difference = -0.14 mm; 95% CI = -0.22, -0.05). No significant differences were found between the protocols for the other variables.

conclusionsThe available evidence supports the clinical efficacy of the early implant placement protocol. Present findings indicate that the early implant placement protocol results in implant outcomes similar to immediate and delayed placement protocols and a superior stability of peri-implant hard tissue compared with immediate implant placement.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsDental Implants, Single-ToothImmediate Dental Implant LoadingDental Implantation, EndosseousDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDental Restoration FailureTooth ExtractionTooth SocketTreatment OutcomeDental Implantsclinical protocolsdental implantation/methodsdental implantsmeta-analysistime factorstooth extractiontooth socket/surgery

Identifiers

PMID30395355
PMCPMC6500770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.