5-year prosthesis survival · Patients with a shortened dental arch (missing posterior teeth)
Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) showed no clear difference in prosthesis survival compared with removable dental prosthesis (RDP); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Patient satisfaction with prosthesis · Patients with a shortened dental arch (missing posterior teeth)
Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) showed no clear difference in patient satisfaction with prosthesis compared with removable dental prosthesis (RDP); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Incidence-free survival (caries, endodontic treatment, tooth loss) · Patients with a shortened dental arch (missing posterior teeth)
Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) showed no clear difference in incidence-free survival (caries, endodontic treatment, tooth loss) compared with removable dental prosthesis (RDP); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
HR 0.73 [0.06, 8.41]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Caries incidence (2 years) · Patients with a shortened dental arch (missing posterior teeth)
Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) led to lower caries incidence (2 years) compared with removable dental prosthesis (RDP); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients undergoing lateral-window maxillary sinus lift
Resorbable barrier (membrane) to seal the lateral window showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with no membrane to seal the lateral window; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients undergoing crestal maxillary sinus lift
1 finding from 1 review
Checchi 2010 (split-mouth, N = 12): no prosthetic failures in either group.
1 study · 12 participants
GRADE not reported
Prosthesis failure · Patients undergoing lateral-window maxillary sinus lift
1 finding from 1 review
Rickert 2013 (split-mouth, N = 36): no prosthesis failures in either group.
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported
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
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
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
Prosthesis failure · Patients undergoing two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation
1 finding from 1 review
Lindgren 2012 (split-mouth, 11 patients): prosthesis failures 0/11 versus 0/11; none.
1 study · 11 participants
GRADE not reported
Prosthesis failure · Patients with insufficient bone below the maxillary sinus requiring dental implants
One-stage augmentation (implants placed simultaneously) showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with two-stage augmentation (delayed implant placement); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients undergoing one-stage crestal maxillary sinus lift without bone grafts (baseline residual bone height about 6.5 mm)
1 finding from 1 review
Crespi 2012 (parallel, 40 per group): prosthesis failures 0/40 versus 0/40; none.
1 study · 80 participants
GRADE not reported
Prosthesis failure · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Participants with an atrophic maxilla who cannot be rehabilitated with conventional dental implants due to lack of bone (including…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients who are having osseointegrated root-form dental implants
It is very uncertain whether immediate loading changes prosthesis failure compared with early loading (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients who are having osseointegrated root-form dental implants
Occlusal loading showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with non-occlusal loading; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 1.00 [0.31, 3.22]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Prosthesis failure · Patients who are having osseointegrated root-form dental implants
It is very uncertain whether immediate loading changes prosthesis failure compared with conventional loading (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Adults undergoing dental implant placement
Prophylactic systemic antibiotics (amoxicillin) showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with no antibiotics or placebo; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Prosthesis failure · Patients who are having osseointegrated root-form dental implants
It is very uncertain whether early loading changes prosthesis failure compared with conventional loading (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review