A interface implante-pilar interfere na perda de osso marginal? Uma revisão sistemática e meta-análise

• Ano de defesa: 2018
• Autor(a) principal: Rosa, Enéias Carpejani
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Positivo; Brasil; Pós-Graduação; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Odontologia Clínica; UP
• Palavras-chave em Português: Odontologia; Implantes dentários; Ensaios clínicos; Dentes - Anomalias; CNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::ODONTOLOGIA
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.cruzeirodosul.edu.br/handle/123456789/2233

The objective of this systematic review was to compare the conical internal connection (IC) with the external hexagonal connection (EH) on the occurrence of marginal bone loss (ΔMBL). Different databases were used to carry out the selection of the elected studies. The studies were judged according to the risk of bias as "high", "low" and "unclear” risk. For the meta-analysis we included only studies that could extract the data of ΔMBL, survival rate (SR) and probing depth (PD). No statistical significant differences were found for ΔMBL data at one, three- and five-year survival rates between implant connections (p <0.05), however statistical significant differences were found for PD between EH and IC implants (1 year follow-up) -0.53 [95% CI -0.82 to -0.24, p = 0.0004]. This present systematic review demonstrated that there are no significant differences between IC and EH implants for both ΔMBL and SR at 1, 3 e 5 years after functional loading, although better PD values were observed for implants pertaining to the IC connections. Considering the high heterogeneity, more well-delineated, randomized clinical trials should be conducted.