Search

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

366 questions · 379 findings · 22 reviews · Implants and prosthodontics · related questions CL0289

No studies found 51 · 13.5%GRADE not reported 248 · 65.4%Very low 65 · 17.2%Low 9 · 2.4%Moderate 6 · 1.6%High 0 · 0%

Dual mini-screw implant vs Single mini-screw implant

Duration of space closure · Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment requiring surgical (mini-screw implant) anchorage

Dual mini-screw implant showed no clear difference in duration of space closure compared with single mini-screw implant; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Hand mallet (osteotomes) vs Electric mallet

Implant failure · Patients undergoing one-stage crestal maxillary sinus lift without bone grafts (baseline residual bone height about 6.5 mm)

Hand mallet (osteotomes) showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with electric mallet; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm implants vs Lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and implants at least 10 mm long

Prosthesis failure · Patients with 3 to 6 mm of residual bone height at the sinus floor

One-stage crestal-approach sinus lift with autogenous bone and 8 mm… showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) vs Sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier maintaining space / no bone)

Prosthesis failure · Patients with an atrophic maxillary sinus requiring augmentation (1 to 5 mm residual bone height)

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Turned (smoother) implant surfaces vs Roughened implant surfaces

Peri-implantitis · Adults with missing teeth who received osseointegrated root-formed oral implants, functionally loaded and followed for at least 1 year

Turned (smoother) implant surfaces may leads to lower peri-implantitis compared with roughened implant surfaces (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.)

Residual overjet at the end of treatment · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage augmentation (implants placed simultaneously) vs Two-stage augmentation (delayed implant placement)

Implant failure · Patients with insufficient bone below the maxillary sinus requiring dental implants

One-stage augmentation (implants placed simultaneously) showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with two-stage augmentation (delayed implant placement); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.)

Patient discomfort · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Osteotomes with mallet (Summers' technique) vs Rotary instruments (Cosci technique)

Complications · Patients undergoing crestal maxillary sinus lift

Osteotomes with mallet (Summers' technique) showed no clear difference in complications compared with rotary instruments (Cosci technique); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.)

Duration of overall treatment · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) showed no clear difference in duration of overall treatment compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pre-drilling mini-screw implant vs Self-drilling mini-screw implant

Success of the anchorage device · Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment requiring surgical (mini-screw implant) anchorage

Pre-drilling mini-screw implant showed no clear difference in success of the anchorage device compared with self-drilling mini-screw implant; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Dual mini-screw implant vs Single mini-screw implant

Mesiodistal movement of the upper first permanent molar · Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment requiring surgical (mini-screw implant) anchorage

Dual mini-screw implant led to higher mesiodistal movement of the upper first permanent molar compared with single mini-screw implant; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Steri-Oss acid-etched titanium screws vs Southern blasted/etched titanium screws

Implant failure · Adults with missing teeth who received osseointegrated root-formed oral implants, functionally loaded and followed for at least 1 year

Steri-Oss acid-etched titanium screws showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with southern blasted/etched titanium screws; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Southern regular implants vs Neoss turned implants

Implant failure · Adults with missing teeth who received osseointegrated root-formed oral implants, functionally loaded and followed for at least 1 year

Southern regular implants showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with neoss turned implants; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

One-stage lateral sinus lift with monocortical autogenous bone blocks (iliac crest) vs Two-stage lateral sinus lift with autogenous particulate bone (iliac crest)

Prosthesis failure · Patients with 2 to 7 mm of residual alveolar bone height in the edentulous maxillary sinus floor

One-stage lateral sinus lift with monocortical autogenous bone… showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with two-stage lateral sinus lift with autogenous particulate bone (iliac…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) vs Sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier maintaining space / no bone)

Complications · Patients with an atrophic maxillary sinus requiring augmentation (1 to 5 mm residual bone height)

Sinus lift with bone graft (granular Bio-Oss) showed no clear difference in complications compared with sinus lift without bone graft (Inion resorbable rigid barrier…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.)

Duration of space closure · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) showed no clear difference in duration of space closure compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review