Till sidans topp

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

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

Turned versus anodised de… - 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!




Turned versus anodised dental implants: a meta-analysis

Artikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift
Författare B. R. Chrcanovic
Tomas Albrektsson
A. Wennerberg
Publicerad i Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Volym 43
Nummer/häfte 9
Sidor 716-728
ISSN 0305-182X
Publiceringsår 2016
Publicerad vid Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper, Avdelningen för biomaterialvetenskap
Sidor 716-728
Språk en
Länkar dx.doi.org/10.1111/joor.12415
Ämnesord anodised implants, dental implants, implant failure rate, marginal bone loss, meta-analysis, turned implants
Ämneskategorier Kirurgi, Oto-rino-laryngologi, Odontologi

Sammanfattning

The aim of this meta-analysis was to test the null hypothesis of no difference in the implant failure rates, marginal bone loss (MBL)and post-operative infection for patients being rehabilitated by turned versus anodised-surface implants, against the alternative hypothesis of a difference. An electronic search without time or language restrictions was undertaken in November 2015. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, either randomised or not. Thirty-eight publications were included. The results suggest a risk ratio of 2·82 (95% CI 1·95–4·06, P < 0·00001) for failure of turned implants, when compared to anodised-surface implants. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results when only the studies inserting implants in maxillae or mandibles were pooled. There were no statistically significant effects of turned implants on the MBL (mean difference-MD 0·02, 95%CI −0·16–0·20; P = 0·82) in comparison to anodised implants. The results of a meta-regression considering the follow-up period as a covariate suggested an increase of the MD with the increase in the follow-up time (MD increase 0·012 mm year−1), however, without a statistical significance (P = 0·813). Due to lack of satisfactory information, meta-analysis for the outcome ‘post-operative infection’ was not performed. The results have to be interpreted with caution due to the presence of several confounding factors in the included studies. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

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?