Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37861610›Full record

SynthesisJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society

Clinical outcomes of implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation of severely atrophic maxilla: A systematic review.

Shachi Atul Alsi, Saee Deshpande, Neelam Pande

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Shachi Atul AlsiDepartment of Prosthodontics, VSPM DCRC, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Saee DeshpandeDepartment of Prosthodontics, VSPM DCRC, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Neelam PandeDepartment of Prosthodontics, VSPM DCRC, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Creative Commons · USACPM Dental College and Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the clinical outcomes for the various methods of rehabilitation of a severely atrophic maxilla with the help of implant-supported fixed prosthesis. Materials and Methods: The relevant publications published between 2013 and 2022 and written only in English were identified using an electronic search. The primary research question for this study was developed based on the PICO framework, which stands for population, intervention, control, and outcomes which was "What are the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with severely atrophic maxilla?" The relevancy of the articles was confirmed by examining their titles, abstracts, and complete texts to determine whether they satisfied the requirements for inclusion. Utilizing specialized study design-related bias assessment forms, the risk of bias was evaluated. Results: The database search resulted in 1568 results; however, 1529 of them were eliminated because of insufficient, duplicate, or missing data. Additionally, manual searching yielded 11 articles. After 50 full-text papers were assessed for eligibility, 17 articles were eliminated. Thus, 33 studies in total are included in the current systematic review. Risk of bias analysis and GRADE evidence analysis were performed. Data were found to be heterogeneous and thus meta-analysis could not be done and narrative synthesis is presented. Conclusion: The patient's condition and the clinician's expertise play a role in taking the decision on choice of technique for the fixed implant-supported rehabilitation of the severely atrophic maxilla. A high success and survival rate is produced by the majority of fixed implant-assisted prostheses despite the biologic and prosthetic problems. A single approach cannot be recommended as the gold standard. The choice is dependent on the patient's biological factors as well as the clinician's expertise. The included studies were assessed using GRADE criteria. The quality of evidence is low-medium. Therefore, to better comprehend the clinical effectiveness of the treatment alternatives, more well-designed randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up period are required.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsAtrophyDental Implantation, EndosseousHumansMaxillaTreatment OutcomeDental ImplantsDental implantfixed prosthesisimplant failurespatient satisfactionprosthetic complicationspterygoid implantseverely atrophiczygomatic implant

Identifiers

PMID37861610
PMCPMC10705006
OpenAlexW4387789120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.