6533b7d4fe1ef96bd1261e8e

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Radiological Outcomes of Bone-Level and Tissue-Level Dental Implants: Systematic Review

Miguel Peñarrocha-diagoSaverio CosolaSimone MarconciniDavid Peñarrocha-oltraGiovanni Battista Menchini FabrisUgo CovaniMichela Boccuzzi

subject

marginal bone lossbone-levelHealth Toxicology and MutagenesisMEDLINEAlveolar Bone Losslcsh:MedicineDentistryReviewtransmucosalBone and Bones03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineQualitative analysissystematic reviewMedicineHumans030212 general & internal medicineDental Restoration FailureLongitudinal StudiesProspective StudiesBone levelSurvival rateRetrospective StudiesDental Implantstissue-leveldentistrybusiness.industrylcsh:RPublic Health Environmental and Occupational HealthTissue levelMean age030206 dentistryMiddle AgedRadiological weaponImplant typesbusiness

description

Purpose: to assess any differences on marginal bone loss between bone-level or tissue-level dental implants through a review of literature until September 2019. Materials and methods: MEDLINE, Embase and other database were searched by two independent authors. The search was limited to articles in English. Results: The search provided 1028 records and, after removing the duplicates through titles and abstracts screening, 45 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. For qualitative analysis 20 articles were included, 17 articles of them for quantitative analysis. A total of 1161 patients (mean age 54,4 years) and 2933 implants were observed, 1427 (Tissue-level) and 1506 (Bone-level). The survival rate and the success rate were more than 90%, except for 2 studies with a success rate of 88% and 86.2%. No studies reported any differences between groups in term of success and survival rates. Three studies showed that BL-implants had statistically less marginal bone loss (P< 0.05). Only one study reported statistically less marginal bone loss in TL-implants (P< 0.05). In the most part of the studies, differences between implant types in marginal bone loss were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Despite to the peri-implant tissue around transmucosal implants has been reported to be inflammation-free because of the absence of bacterial infiltration in the micro-gap between the fixture and abutment, no clinical and radiological differences were highlighted between groups from the included studies after a variable period of follow-up ranged between 1 to 5 years.