Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The implant abutment connection interface has been considered one of the major factors affecting the outcome of implant therapy. However, drawbacks of traditional meta-analyses are the inability to compare more than 2 treatments at a time, which complicates the decision-making...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Camps Font, Octavi, Rubianes-Porta, Laura, Valmaseda Castellón, Eduardo, Jung, Ronald E., Gay Escoda, Cosme, Barbosa de Figueiredo, Rui Pedro
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2021
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:2445/184204
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/184204
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Implants dentals
Pròtesis dentals
Cirurgia oral
Dental implants
Dental prosthesis
Oral surgery
id ES_abc945dafcbcc60ba06e246b3d7eafd0
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:2445/184204
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trialsCamps Font, OctaviRubianes-Porta, LauraValmaseda Castellón, EduardoJung, Ronald E.Gay Escoda, CosmeBarbosa de Figueiredo, Rui PedroImplants dentalsPròtesis dentalsCirurgia oralDental implantsDental prosthesisOral surgerySTATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The implant abutment connection interface has been considered one of the major factors affecting the outcome of implant therapy. However, drawbacks of traditional meta-analyses are the inability to compare more than 2 treatments at a time, which complicates the decision-making process for dental clinicians, and the lack of a network meta-analysis. PURPOSE: The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to assess whether the implant abutment connection influences the outcome of implant-supported prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials comparing the effect of at least 2 different implant abutment connection designs published from 2009 up to May 2020. Outcome variables were implant survival rate, peri-implant marginal bone loss, and biologic and prosthetic complication rates at 12 months after prosthetic loading. Relevant information was extracted, and quality and risk of bias assessed. Pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses based on a multivariate random-effects meta-regression were performed to assess the comparisons (α=.05 for all analyses). RESULTS: For peri-implant marginal bone loss and prosthetic complications, conical interfaces were determined to be the most effective, with significant differences when compared with external hexagonal connections (P=.011 and P=.038, respectively). No significant differences were found among the implant abutment connections in terms of survival and biologic complications (P>.05 in all direct, indirect, and mixed comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: After 1 year of loading, conical connections showed lower marginal bone loss and fewer prosthetic complications than external hexagonal connections. However, the implant abutment connection design had no influence on the implant survival and biologic complication rates.Elsevier2022202220212022info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article14 p.application/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/184204Articles publicats en revistes (Odontoestomatologia)reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)InglésReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.029Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2021, vol. S0022-3913, num. 21, p. 529-1https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.029cc-by (c) Camps Font, Octavi et al., 2021https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:2445/1842042026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
spellingShingle Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Camps Font, Octavi
Implants dentals
Pròtesis dentals
Cirurgia oral
Dental implants
Dental prosthesis
Oral surgery
title_short Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_fullStr Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_sort Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Camps Font, Octavi
Rubianes-Porta, Laura
Valmaseda Castellón, Eduardo
Jung, Ronald E.
Gay Escoda, Cosme
Barbosa de Figueiredo, Rui Pedro
author Camps Font, Octavi
author_facet Camps Font, Octavi
Rubianes-Porta, Laura
Valmaseda Castellón, Eduardo
Jung, Ronald E.
Gay Escoda, Cosme
Barbosa de Figueiredo, Rui Pedro
author_role author
author2 Rubianes-Porta, Laura
Valmaseda Castellón, Eduardo
Jung, Ronald E.
Gay Escoda, Cosme
Barbosa de Figueiredo, Rui Pedro
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Implants dentals
Pròtesis dentals
Cirurgia oral
Dental implants
Dental prosthesis
Oral surgery
topic Implants dentals
Pròtesis dentals
Cirurgia oral
Dental implants
Dental prosthesis
Oral surgery
description STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The implant abutment connection interface has been considered one of the major factors affecting the outcome of implant therapy. However, drawbacks of traditional meta-analyses are the inability to compare more than 2 treatments at a time, which complicates the decision-making process for dental clinicians, and the lack of a network meta-analysis. PURPOSE: The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to assess whether the implant abutment connection influences the outcome of implant-supported prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was undertaken to identify all randomized clinical trials comparing the effect of at least 2 different implant abutment connection designs published from 2009 up to May 2020. Outcome variables were implant survival rate, peri-implant marginal bone loss, and biologic and prosthetic complication rates at 12 months after prosthetic loading. Relevant information was extracted, and quality and risk of bias assessed. Pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses based on a multivariate random-effects meta-regression were performed to assess the comparisons (α=.05 for all analyses). RESULTS: For peri-implant marginal bone loss and prosthetic complications, conical interfaces were determined to be the most effective, with significant differences when compared with external hexagonal connections (P=.011 and P=.038, respectively). No significant differences were found among the implant abutment connections in terms of survival and biologic complications (P>.05 in all direct, indirect, and mixed comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: After 1 year of loading, conical connections showed lower marginal bone loss and fewer prosthetic complications than external hexagonal connections. However, the implant abutment connection design had no influence on the implant survival and biologic complication rates.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021
2022
2022
2022
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/2445/184204
url https://hdl.handle.net/2445/184204
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.029
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2021, vol. S0022-3913, num. 21, p. 529-1
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.029
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv cc-by (c) Camps Font, Octavi et al., 2021
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv cc-by (c) Camps Font, Octavi et al., 2021
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 14 p.
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Articles publicats en revistes (Odontoestomatologia)
reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869416299046633473
score 15.812429

Similares en LA Referencia