Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34239926›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2021

Use of Narrow-Diameter Implants in Completely Edentulous Patients as a Prosthetic Option: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

S Storelli, A Caputo, G Palandrani, M Peditto, M Del Fabbro, E Romeo, G Oteri

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Analysis of factors affecting bone volume changes after immediate implantation in the maxillary central incisor.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

7 authors.

S StorelliDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7412-0596
A CaputoDepartment of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, University of Messina, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2411-2579
G PalandraniDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8406-2724
M PedittoDepartment of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, University of Messina, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6995-6276
M Del FabbroDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7144-0984
E RomeoDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4413-1614
G OteriDepartment of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, University of Messina, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0941-1645

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of the present review is to assess the implant survival, marginal bone loss, and biomechanical features of narrow-diameter implants (2.5-3.5 mm) supporting or retaining full-arch fixed or removable restorations. MATERIALS AND

methodsThree operators screened the literature (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) and performed a hand search on the main journals that focus on implantology until 24 March 2019. Only articles that considered full-arch restorations supported or retained by narrow-diameter implants (2.5-3.5 mm) were considered if they have a minimum of 10 patients and a mean follow-up of at least 6 months. The outcome variables were survival of implants and marginal bone loss. The review was performed according to the PRISMA statements. Risk of bias assessment was evaluated. Failure rates were analyzed using random effect Poisson regression models to obtain the summary estimate of 5-year survival rate and marginal bone loss.

resultsA total of nine papers were finally selected, reporting a high survival rate of the implants. Eight studies focused only on the mandible while one study reported data from both mandible and maxilla. All studies reported on removable restorations; none focused on fixed rehabilitations. The estimated survival rate for 5 years of follow-up was calculated to be 92.25% for the implants. The estimated marginal bone loss after 5 years was calculated to be 1.40 mm. No study reported implant fractures.

conclusionsWith the limitations of the present study, there is evidence that 2.5-3.5 mm narrow-diameter implants retaining a removable restoration can be a successful treatment in fully edentulous patients. No data on fixed restorations was available.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsProsthesis DesignBiomechanical PhenomenaBone DiseasesHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMandibleMaxillaMouth, EdentulousDental Implants

Identifiers

PMID34239926
PMCPMC8241526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.