Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

A systematic review and m… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Webbkarta
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Kontaktformulär








 


OBS! Vill du ha svar, ange e-post eller telefonnummer!




A systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term studies (five or more years) assessing maxillary sinus floor augmentation

Forskningsöversiktsartikel
Författare T. Starch-Jensen
H. Aludden
M. Hallman
Christer Dahlin
A. E. Christensen
A. Mordenfeld
Publicerad i International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volym 47
Sidor 103-116
ISSN 0901-5027
Publiceringsår 2018
Publicerad vid Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper, Avdelningen för biomaterialvetenskap
Sidor 103-116
Språk en
Länkar doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2017.05.001
Ämnesord alveolar ridge augmentation, dental implants, oral surgical procedures, review, sinus floor augmentation
Ämneskategorier Biomaterialvetenskap

Sammanfattning

© 2017 International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons The objective was to test the hypothesis of no difference in long-term (≥5 years) implant treatment outcomes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) with autogenous bone graft compared to a mixture of autogenous bone graft and bone substitutes or bone substitutes alone. A MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Library search in combination with a hand-search of relevant journals was conducted. Human studies published in English between January 1, 1990 and October 1, 2016 were included. Nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The survival of suprastructures has never been compared within the same study. The 5-year implant survival after MSFA with autogenous bone graft was 97%, compared to 95% for Bio-Oss; the reduction in vertical height of the augmented sinus was equivalent with the two treatment modalities. Non-comparative studies demonstrated high survival rates for suprastructures and implants regardless of the grafting material used. Meta-analysis revealed an overall estimated patient-based implant survival of 95% (confidence interval 0.92–0.96). High implant stability quotient values, high patient satisfaction, and limited peri-implant marginal bone loss were revealed in non-comparative studies. No long-term randomized controlled trial comparing the different treatment modalities was identified. Hence, the conclusions drawn from the results of this systematic review should be interpreted with caution.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11
Dela:

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?