Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

22 questions · 22 findings · 4 reviews · Implants and prosthodontics

No studies found 1 · 4.5%GRADE not reported 18 · 81.8%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 4.5%Moderate 2 · 9.1%High 0 · 0%

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Patient satisfaction · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Treatment costs · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Patient preference · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Complications (at treated sites) · 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 may leads to higher complications (at treated sites) compared with short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Augmentation procedure failure · Patients with missing teeth and an atrophic posterior maxilla, with residual bone height between 4 and 9 mm below the maxillary sinus
1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

Implant 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 implant failure compared with short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary sinus lift (augmentation) with long implants vs Short implants (5 to 8.5 mm) without sinus augmentation

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

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Severe pain for > 1 week · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher severe pain for > 1 week compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Experienced the operation negatively · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in experienced the operation negatively compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

No improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to lower no improvement of facial appearance (3 weeks) compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Prosthetic failure (2 years) · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in prosthetic failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Major complications · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… led to higher major complications compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer implants (vertical augmentation) vs Short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation

Implant failure · Patients with atrophic (resorbed) mandibles needing implants

Inlay/interposed bone graft (iliac or Bio-Oss block) + longer… showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with short implants (8 to 11 mm) without augmentation; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Patients' perception of how long treatment took · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… led to lower patients' perception of how long treatment took compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Direct resin composite veneer vs Indirect resin composite veneer

Restoration failure · Patients with permanent anterior teeth with intrinsic staining suitable for laminate veneer restorations
1 finding from 1 review
  • Meijering 1998 (data by restoration, not pooled; no statistical analysis possible). Failures over 2-year follow-up: direct resin composite (n=69) 4 absolute and 14 relative failures; indirect resin composite (n=54) 7…
    1 study · 123 participants
    GRADE not reported

Indirect veneer with no incisal edge reduction vs Indirect veneer with incisal edge reduction (1.5 mm plus short palatal bevel)

Restoration longevity · Patients receiving indirect laminate veneer restorations on permanent anterior teeth
1 finding from 1 review

Direct resin composite veneer vs Porcelain (indirect) veneer

Restoration failure · Patients with permanent anterior teeth with intrinsic staining suitable for laminate veneer restorations
1 finding from 1 review
  • Meijering 1998 (data by restoration, not pooled; no statistical analysis possible). Failures over 2-year follow-up: direct resin composite (n=69) 4 absolute and 14 relative failures; porcelain (n=56) 0 absolute and 3…
    1 study · 125 participants
    GRADE not reported

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

Complications · 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 complications compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; 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

Implant 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 implant failure compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; 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

Partial graft loss · 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 partial graft loss compared with lateral-window sinus lift with 50% autogenous bone/50% Bio-Oss and…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review