Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37833674›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2023

A systematic review on removal of osseointegrated implants: un update.

Giuseppe Tafuri, Manlio Santilli, Eugenio Manciocchi, Imena Rexhepi, Gianmaria D'Addazio, Sergio Caputi, Bruna Sinjari

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Giuseppe TafuriUnit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Manlio SantilliUnit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Eugenio ManciocchiUnit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Imena RexhepiUnit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Gianmaria D'AddazioUnit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Sergio Caputi *Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Bruna Sinjari *Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti- Pescara, 66100, Chieti, Italy. b.sinjari@unich.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundToday dental implants represent an effective therapy in case of partial or total edentulism, with an excellent success rate. Despite the results obtained, there may be biological or mechanical complications during the therapy, which lead to the loss of the implant. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current state of the art in the literature on techniques used for the removal of dental implants. Various aspects will be analyzed, such as the success of the technique, any complications, and the advantages and disadvantages of their use.

methodsTwo reviewers conducted a literature analysis (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) of the last 20 years (2003-2023). The main criterion analyzed was the success of the technique, while secondary outcomes such as complications and risks of the technique were also analyzed. 258 articles were identified in the various search databases. 42 eligible articles were subsequently identified after an article screening. Only 18 full texts were subsequently included in the review.

resultsA total of 18 articles were selected and 1142 implants and 595 patients were included. The main techniques used were the Counter-Torque Ratchet Technique (CTRT), Piezoelectric bone surgery (PBS), trephine drills, carbide burs, Erbium, Chromium, Yttrium, Scandium, Gallium, Garnett (Er:Cr:YSGG) laser and carbon dioxide (CO

conclusionsThe use of conservative techniques, especially CTRT, in bone removal is useful to allow for immediate implant placement in the removal area. However, further studies with a high sample size are needed to be performed on all techniques, particularly new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that allow for the analysis of the success of alternative techniques such as Laser and Piezosurgery, which appear to be very promising.

Indexed as

Bone-Anchored ProsthesisDental ImplantsLasers, Solid-StateDental Implantation, EndosseousHumansYttriumDental ImplantsYttriumDental implantExplantationImplantsRemovalSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37833674
PMCPMC10576342

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.