Affordable Access

deepdyve-link
Publisher Website

The effect of supportive care in preventing peri-implant diseases and implant loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors
  • Lin, Cho-Ying1, 2
  • Chen, Zhaozhao3
  • Pan, Whei-Lin1, 2
  • Wang, Hom-Lay3, 4
  • 1 Department of Periodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. , (Taiwan)
  • 2 Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan. , (Taiwan)
  • 3 Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • 4 State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease, Department of Prosthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. , (China)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley (Blackwell Publishing)
Publication Date
Aug 01, 2019
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
714–724
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13496
PMID: 31231883
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

To evaluate the influence of supportive treatment (SPT) during a maintenance period after implant placement on implant survival rate (SR) and incidence of peri-implant diseases. A systemic literature search for studies published up to June 2018 was conducted by two independent reviewers using Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases. Clinical controlled trials (CCT) involved in SPT protocol with more than 1-year follow-up were included. Quantitative meta-analyses were carried out to analyze the risk ratio (RR) of SR, the incidence of peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis between SPT and non-SPT groups. Any potential confounding factors were investigated using meta-regression. Nine CCTs fulfilled the criteria. To evaluate the influence of SPT on SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis, six of nine, three of nine, and three of nine articles were included in further meta-analysis, respectively. SPT group significantly showed higher SR (RR: 1.10; p < 0.001), lower prevalence of peri-implantitis (RR: 0.25; p < 0.001) and peri-implant mucositis (RR: 0.57; p < 0.001) than the non-SPT group. Meta-regression of the selected studies failed to find an association between SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis and confounding factors: application of chemical agents and the frequency of SPT. SPT can potentially improve peri-implant health in terms of SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis. Additionally, the correlation in recall interval and adjunctive use of chemical agents during SPT to peri-implant diseases and implant loss could not be found. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times