PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide detailed insights into the clinical performance of short and longer dental implants placed simultaneously with bone augmentation.
UNASSIGNED: The search for literature was performed across MEDLINE (PubMed), ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library databases, adhering to specific selection criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 were considered for data collection. Primary outcomes were survival rate (SR), marginal bone loss (MBL) and complications. Clinical outcomes were as follows: bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), and implant stability quotient (ISQ). Quality and risk of bias assessment were evaluated by the Critical Appraisal Checklist tool for randomized controlled trials developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 14678 articles were screened, with 9 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 495 patients with 984 implants (491 short and 493 longer implants) showing a SR of 93.91% for the short implants and 91.83% for the longer implants. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant difference between short implants and longer implants simultaneously placed with alveolar bone augmentation in relation to MBL (-0.513 mm, 95% CI = -0.93 to -0.096; P = 0.02), and in PPD (-0.247, 95% CI = -0.515 to 0.022; P = 0.07).
UNASSIGNED: When comparing the results of treatment with short and longer dental implants combined with alveolar bone augmentation, short implants showed better clinical results regarding the parameters of survival rate, marginal bone loss and complications.
UNASSIGNED: The search for literature was performed across MEDLINE (PubMed), ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library databases, adhering to specific selection criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 were considered for data collection. Primary outcomes were survival rate (SR), marginal bone loss (MBL) and complications. Clinical outcomes were as follows: bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), and implant stability quotient (ISQ). Quality and risk of bias assessment were evaluated by the Critical Appraisal Checklist tool for randomized controlled trials developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 14678 articles were screened, with 9 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 495 patients with 984 implants (491 short and 493 longer implants) showing a SR of 93.91% for the short implants and 91.83% for the longer implants. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant difference between short implants and longer implants simultaneously placed with alveolar bone augmentation in relation to MBL (-0.513 mm, 95% CI = -0.93 to -0.096; P = 0.02), and in PPD (-0.247, 95% CI = -0.515 to 0.022; P = 0.07).
UNASSIGNED: When comparing the results of treatment with short and longer dental implants combined with alveolar bone augmentation, short implants showed better clinical results regarding the parameters of survival rate, marginal bone loss and complications.
摘要：
■这项系统综述和荟萃分析旨在提供详细的见解，以了解与骨增强同时放置的较短和较长的牙科植入物的临床表现。
■在MEDLINE（PubMed）上进行了文献搜索，ScienceDirect和Cochrane图书馆数据库，遵守特定的选择标准和系统审查和荟萃分析（PRISMA）指南的首选报告项目。只有2014年至2024年之间以英文发表的文章才被考虑用于数据收集。主要结果是生存率（SR），边缘骨丢失（MBL）和并发症。临床结果如下：探查出血（BOP），牙周袋深度（PPD），和植入物稳定性商(ISQ)。通过JoannaBriggs研究所开发的随机对照试验的关键评估清单工具评估偏倚评估的质量和风险。
■共筛选了14678篇文章，9符合纳入标准，并被用于本系统综述和荟萃分析。共有495名患者使用984个植入物（491个短植入物和493个较长植入物），短植入物的SR为93.91％，较长植入物的SR为91.83％。荟萃分析显示，同时放置牙槽骨增强的短植入物和长植入物与MBL之间存在统计学上的显着差异（-0.513mm，95%CI=-0.93至-0.096；P=0.02），和PPD（-0.247，95%CI=-0.515至0.022；P=0.07）。
■当比较短和更长的牙科植入物结合牙槽骨增强的治疗结果时，短植入物在存活率参数方面显示出更好的临床结果，边缘骨丢失和并发症。
■在MEDLINE（PubMed）上进行了文献搜索，ScienceDirect和Cochrane图书馆数据库，遵守特定的选择标准和系统审查和荟萃分析（PRISMA）指南的首选报告项目。只有2014年至2024年之间以英文发表的文章才被考虑用于数据收集。主要结果是生存率（SR），边缘骨丢失（MBL）和并发症。临床结果如下：探查出血（BOP），牙周袋深度（PPD），和植入物稳定性商(ISQ)。通过JoannaBriggs研究所开发的随机对照试验的关键评估清单工具评估偏倚评估的质量和风险。
■共筛选了14678篇文章，9符合纳入标准，并被用于本系统综述和荟萃分析。共有495名患者使用984个植入物（491个短植入物和493个较长植入物），短植入物的SR为93.91％，较长植入物的SR为91.83％。荟萃分析显示，同时放置牙槽骨增强的短植入物和长植入物与MBL之间存在统计学上的显着差异（-0.513mm，95%CI=-0.93至-0.096；P=0.02），和PPD（-0.247，95%CI=-0.515至0.022；P=0.07）。
■当比较短和更长的牙科植入物结合牙槽骨增强的治疗结果时，短植入物在存活率参数方面显示出更好的临床结果，边缘骨丢失和并发症。
