Crestal bone loss around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants: A systematic review

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

Statement of problem.

To my knowledge, there is no systematic review of crestal bone loss (CBL) around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants.

Purpose.

The purpose of this review was to systematically assess CBL around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants.

Material and methods.

The addressed focused question was, “Does crestal and subcrestal placement of dental implants influence crestal bone levels?” Databases were searched from 1986 through October 2015 using different combinations of the following keywords: crestal, sub-crestal, bone loss, dental implant, submerged, and nonsubmerged. Reference lists of potentially relevant original and review articles were hand-searched to identify any further studies. Letters to the editor, case reports, commentaries, studies on platform-switched implants, and studies published in languages other than English were excluded.

Results.

In total, 13 studies (6 human and 7 animal), which were performed at universities, were included. In the human studies, the number of participants ranged from 8 to 84 individuals. The follow-up period ranged from 1 to 5 years. CBL at the test sites ranged from 0.17 mm to 0.9 mm and at control sites from 0.02 mm to 1.4 mm. Five human studies reported no significant difference in CBL around implants placed at the test and control sites. All animal studies were performed in dogs with a mean age ranging from 1 to approximately 2 years. The follow-up period ranged from 2 to 6 months. Four animal studies reported no significant difference in CBL around submerged and nonsubmerged implants.

Conclusion.

No significant difference in CBL was found around submerged and nonsubmerged dental implants.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles