Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36976066›Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2023

Comparing the Long-Term Success Rates of Tooth Preservation and Dental Implants: A Critical Review.

Suelen Cristina Sartoretto, Jamil Awad Shibli, Kayvon Javid, Khalila Cotrim, Antonio Canabarro, Rafael Seabra Louro, Adam Lowenstein, Carlos Fernando Mourão, Vittorio Moraschini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Ameliorating Effect ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Suelen Cristina SartorettoDepartment of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói 24020-140, Brazil.
Jamil Awad ShibliDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental Research Division, University of Guarulhos, São Paulo 07023-070, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1971-0195
Kayvon JavidDepartment of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói 24020-140, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-8404-6940
Khalila CotrimDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental Research Division, University of Guarulhos, São Paulo 07023-070, Brazil.
Antonio CanabarroDepartment of Periodontology, Dental Research Division, School of Dentistry, Veiga de Almeida University, Rio de Janeiro 20271-020, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3970-9047
Rafael Seabra LouroDepartment of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói 24020-140, Brazil.
Adam LowensteinDepartment of Periodontology, Division Dental Research Administration, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0751-4894
Carlos Fernando MourãoDepartment of Periodontology, Division Dental Research Administration, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5775-0222
Vittorio MoraschiniDepartment of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói 24020-140, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5739-394X

Funding

Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro E-26/201.301/2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implant therapy is considered a predictable, safe, and reliable rehabilitation method for edentulous patients in most clinical scenarios. Thus, there is a growing trend in the indications for implants, which seems attributable not only to their clinical success but also to arguments such as a more "simplified approach" based on convenience or the belief that dental implants are as good as natural teeth. Therefore, the objective of this critical literature review of observational studies was to discuss the evidence concerning the long-term survival rates and treatment outcomes, comparing endodontically or periodontally treated teeth with dental implants. Altogether, the evidence suggests that the decision between keeping a tooth or replacing it with an implant should carefully consider the condition of the tooth (e.g., amount of remaining tooth and degree of attachment loss and mobility), systemic disorders, and patient preference. Although observational studies revealed high success rates and long-term survival of dental implants, failures and complications are common. For this reason, attempts should be made to first save maintainable teeth over the long-term, instead of immediately replacing teeth with dental implants.

Indexed as

dental implantsendodontic treatmentperiodontal treatmentsuccess ratessurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID36976066
PMCPMC10055991

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.