Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

26 questions · 26 findings · 5 reviews · Implants and prosthodontics · All outcomes

No studies found 1 · 3.8%GRADE not reported 15 · 57.7%Very low 7 · 26.9%Low 1 · 3.8%Moderate 2 · 7.7%High 0 · 0%

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Bar attachment system

Re-treatment: replacement of attachment system (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes re-treatment: replacement of attachment system (short term) compared with bar attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Bar attachment system

Re-treatment: repair of attachment system (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes re-treatment: repair of attachment system (short term) compared with bar attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Bar attachment system

Prosthodontic success (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)
1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Telescopic attachment system

Prosthodontic maintenance: patrix replaced (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes prosthodontic maintenance: patrix replaced (short term) compared with telescopic attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Telescopic attachment system

Prosthodontic maintenance: matrix activated (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes prosthodontic maintenance: matrix activated (short term) compared with telescopic attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Telescopic attachment system

Prosthodontic maintenance: reline of implant overdenture (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes prosthodontic maintenance: reline of implant overdenture (short term) compared with telescopic attachment system (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Ball (stud) attachment system vs Telescopic attachment system

Prosthodontic maintenance: matrix replaced (short term) · Edentulous adults receiving mandibular implant overdentures (opposing conventional complete maxillary dentures)

It is very uncertain whether ball (stud) attachment system changes prosthodontic maintenance: matrix replaced (short term) compared with telescopic attachment system (very 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

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

Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) vs Removable dental prosthesis (RDP)

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

Ceramic implant abutment vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Overall success rate · Patients receiving implant-supported single crowns / short-span FDPs
1 finding from 1 review
  • Andersson 2003: 94% (16/17) ceramic vs 100% (12/12) titanium; Andersson 2001: 93% (28/30) ceramic vs 100% (35/35) titanium; no statistical analysis provided; no measurable / non-significant differences in alveolar bone…
    2 studies · 107 participants
    GRADE not reported

Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) vs Removable dental prosthesis (RDP)

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

Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) vs Removable dental prosthesis (RDP)

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

Fixed dental prosthesis (cantilever FDP) vs Removable dental prosthesis (RDP)

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

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