Search

Aim: To compare the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic for the socket-shield technique and the conventional technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone. Material and methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of clinical studies that evaluated the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic with the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone was performed. A total of 4 databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicated articles and applying the inclusion criteria, 16 articles were selected for the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results: Four randomized controlled trials, five prospective clinical studies, four retrospective studies, and three case series were included in the meta-analysis. The dental implant failure rate for the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement was 1.37% (95% CI, 0.21–2.54%); however, no statistically significant differences between the conventional and socket-shield technique were found. The estimated mean difference in the marginal bone loss for the socket-shield technique was −0.5 mm (95% CI, −0.82 to −0.18) and statistically significant (p < 0.01), with a high heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). The mean pink esthetic score was 12.27 (Q test = 4.47; p-value = 0.61; I2 = 0%). The difference in pink esthetic between the conventional (n = 55) and socket-shield techniques (n = 55) for immediate dental implant placement was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73–1.58; Q test = 8.88; p value = 0.11; I2 = 44%). The follow-up time was found to be significant (beta coefficient = 0.023; R2 = 85.6%; QM = 3.82; p = 0.049) for the PES for the socket-shield technique. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this systematic review with meta-analysis, the dental implant failure rate did not differ between the socket-shield technique and conventional technique for immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. However, a lower marginal bone loss and higher pink esthetic scores were found for the socket-shield technique compared to the conventional technique.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze and compare the survival rate and prosthetic and sinus complications of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla. Materials and methods: We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of clinical studies that evaluated the survival rate and prosthetic and sinus complications of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla. Four databases were consulted during the literature search: Pubmed–Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicate articles and applying the inclusion criteria, 46 articles were selected for the qualitative analysis and 32 for the quantitative analysis. Results: Four randomized controlled trials, 19 prospective clinical studies, 20 retrospective studies, and 3 case series were included in the meta-analysis. Conventional dental implants failure (n = 3549) were seen in 2.89% (IC-95% 1.83–3.96%), while zygomatic dental implants failure (n = 1895) were seen in 0.69% (IC-95% 0.21–1.16%). The measure of the effect size used was the Odds Ratio, which was estimated at 2.05 with a confidence interval of 95% between 1.22 and 3.44 (z test = 2.73; p-value = 0.006). The failure risk of conventional dental implants is 2.1 times higher than that of zygomatic dental implants. Slight heterogeneity was determined in the meta-analysis between 23 combined studies (Q test = 32.4; p-value = 0.070; I2 = 32.1%). Prosthetic complications were recorded in 4.9% (IC-95% 2.7–7.3%) and mild heterogeneity was observed in a meta-analysis of 28 combined studies (Q test = 88.2; p-value = 0.001; I2 = 69.4%). Sinus complications were seen in 4.7% (IC-95% 2.8–6.5%) and mild heterogeneity was observed in a meta-analysis of 32 combined studies (Q test = 75.3; p-value = 0.001; I2 = 58.8%). Conclusions: The high survival rate and low prosthetic and sinus complications related to zygomatic dental implants suggest the use of zygomatic dental implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla.

The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the effect of computer-aided navigation techniques on the accuracy of endodontic access cavities. Materials and methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of clinical studies, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, was performed that evaluated the root canal location rate of computer-aided navigation techniques applied to endodontic access cavities. Four different databases were used to consult the literature: PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science. After discarding duplicate articles and applying inclusion criteria, 14 articles were selected for qualitative analysis and 13 for quantitative analysis. Results: the root canal location success rate started at 98.1% (CI: 95.7–100%) of the cases performed through a computer-aided navigation technique. The prediction interval ranged from 93.3% to 100%. The meta-analysis did not detect heterogeneity between the combined studies (Q-test = 17.3; p = 0.185; I2 = 25%). No statistically significant differences were found between computer-aided static navigation techniques (success rate: 98.5%) and computer-aided dynamic navigation techniques (success rate: 94.5%) (Q test = 0.57; p = 0.451), nor between in vitro studies (success rate: 96.2%) and in vivo studies (success rate: 100%) (Q test = 2.53; p-value = 0.112). An odds success ratio of 13.1 (CI: 95%; 3.48, 49.1) encourages the use of computer-aided navigation techniques over conventional endodontic access cavity procedures. Conclusions: the endodontic access cavities created using static and dynamic computer-aided navigation techniques are highly accurate in locating the root canal system.