Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

6 questions · 6 findings · 1 reviews · Implants and prosthodontics

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Change in probing pocket depth (PPD) · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) led to lower change in probing pocket depth (PPD) compared with bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
4 years
MD -1.4 [-1.99, -0.81]
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Implant failure · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
No implant failure occurred in any of the groups.
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Change in probing attachment level (PAL) · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) led to lower change in probing attachment level (PAL) compared with bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
4 years
MD -1.4 [-2.56, -0.24]
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Complications and side effects · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
No complication occurred in any of the groups.
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Change in gingival recession (REC) · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) showed no clear difference in change in gingival recession (REC) compared with bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
4 years
MD -0.10 [-0.51, 0.31]
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) vs Bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier

Recurrence of peri-implantitis · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (Ostim) showed no clear difference in recurrence of peri-implantitis compared with bovine-derived xenograft (Bio-Oss) plus resorbable barrier; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
4 years
RR 2.0 [0.21, 18.98]
1 study · 22 participants
GRADE not reported