Wir verwenden Cookies, um für diese Website Funktionen wie z.B. Login, einen Warenkorb oder die Sprachwahl zu ermöglichen. Weiterhin nutzen wir für anonymisierte, statistische Auswertungen der Nutzung Google Analytics, welches Cookies setzt. Mehr Informationen finden Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
OK, ich bin einverstanden Ich möchte keine Google Analytics-Cookies
International Journal of Oral Implantology
Login:
Benutzername:

Kennwort:

Plattform:

Kennwort vergessen?

Registrieren

Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), Nr. 2     18. Mai 2020
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), Nr. 2  (18.05.2020)

Seite 141-158, PubMed:32424381, Sprache: Englisch


Piezoelectric bone surgery for implant site preparation compared with conventional drilling techniques: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Stacchi, Claudio / Bassi, Francesco / Troiano, Giuseppe / Rapani, Antonio / Lombardi, Teresa / Jokstad, Asbjørn / Sennerby, Lars / Schierano, Gianmario
Purpose: To evaluate whether the use of piezoelectric bone surgery (PBS) for implant site preparation reduces surgical time, improves implant stability, preserves marginal bone level and improves the survival rate of oral implants compared with conventional drilling techniques.
Materials and methods: This meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis) guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO (international prospective register of systematic reviews) database (CRD42019142749). The PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Open Grey databases were screened for articles published from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2018. The selection criteria included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies (CCTs) comparing the PBS with conventional rotary instruments for implant site preparation, and reporting any of the selected clinical outcomes (surgical time, implant stability, marginal bone variations and implant failure rate) for both groups. The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for CCTs. A meta-analysis was performed, and the power of the meta-analytic findings was assessed by trial sequential analysis (TSA).
Results: Eight RCTs and one CCT met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The meta-analysis and the TSA showed moderate evidence suggesting that the PBS prolongs surgery duration and improves secondary stability 12 weeks after implant placement compared with conventional drilling techniques. Insufficient data are available in literature to assess if the PBS reduces marginal bone loss and/or improves the implant survival rate compared with conventional drilling techniques.
Conclusions: Adequately powered randomised clinical trials are needed to confirm the PBS positive effect on the secondary stability and to draw conclusions about the influence of PBS on marginal bone stability and implant survival.

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this study. The present study received no external funding.

Schlagwörter: implant site preparation, implant stability, piezosurgery, trial sequential analysis
Volltext (keine Berechtigung) einzeln als PDF kaufen (20.00 €)Endnote-Export