Idioma:

Splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Leão, R. S. ; Moraes, S. L. D. ; Vasconcelos, B. C. E. ; Lemos, C. A. A. ; Pellizzer, E. P.

Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2018-08, Vol.45 (8), p.647-656 [Periódico revisado por pares]

England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por

Enviar para

Título:
Splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Autor: Leão, R. S. ; Moraes, S. L. D. ; Vasconcelos, B. C. E. ; Lemos, C. A. A. ; Pellizzer, E. P.
Assuntos: Alveolar Bone Loss - physiopathology ; Bone loss ; bone resorption ; Clinical trials ; complications ; dental implant ; Dental Implants ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported ; Denture Design ; Denture Precision Attachment ; Denture Retention - instrumentation ; Denture, Overlay ; Humans ; Osseointegration - physiology ; overdenture ; Periodontal Attachment Loss - diagnosis ; Periodontal Attachment Loss - physiopathology ; Prostheses ; Statistical analysis ; Survival ; Systematic review ; Transplants & implants
É parte de: Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2018-08, Vol.45 (8), p.647-656
Notas: SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ObjectType-Article-3
ObjectType-Undefined-4
Descrição: Summary Splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems have unique advantages and disadvantages. The aim of the present systematic review was to determine the influence of splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems on the marginal bone loss, prosthetic complications and implant survival rate. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published up to October 2017, using the following search terms: “overdenture AND attachment OR overdenture AND bar OR overdenture splinted.” The PICO question “Do splinted overdenture attachment systems promote better clinical results in comparison to unsplinted systems?” was evaluated. Eligible studies included randomized controlled clinical trials, prospective studies with at least 10 participants and a minimum follow‐up of 6 months, and studies published in English that compared splinted and unsplinted attachment systems within the same study. The 95% confidence interval (CI) was considered for all outcomes analysed. After completion of the different steps in the article selection process, nine articles were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. A total of 984 implants were placed in 380 patients (mean age: 62.8 years). The meta‐analysis demonstrated no statistically significant differences between splinted and unsplinted attachment systems with regard to marginal bone loss (P = .39; MD: −0.11; 95% CI: −0.37 to 0.14), complications (P = .31; RR: 1.26; CI: 0.80‐1.99) and implant survival rate (P = .14; RR: 0.37% CI: 0.10‐1.36). In addition, splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems achieved similar results with regard to marginal bone loss, prosthetic complications and implant survival rate.
Editor: England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Idioma: Inglês

Links

View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed

Voltar para lista de resultados

Realização: Logos de Redes Sociais:

Splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Leão, R. S. ; Moraes, S. L. D. ; Vasconcelos, B. C. E. ; Lemos, C. A. A. ; Pellizzer, E. P.

England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.