Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Bleeding on Probing | Research

Influence of implant diameter on implant survival rate and clinical outcomes in the posterior area: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Paolo Pesce, Massimo Del Fabbro, Laura Modenese, Stefano Sandron, Luca Francetti, Gaetano Isola, Luigi Canullo, Maria Menini

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the present systematic review was to test the hypothesis that the diameter of implants inserted in the posterior area affects implant survival rate, prosthetic survival rate and peri-implant parameters (bleeding on probing (BoP), marginal bone loss (MBL), pocket probing depth (PPD)).

Materials and methods

An electronic search of studies published until December 2021 was done on three databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane) independently by two authors. Clinical trials comparing implant survival rate, BoP, MBL and PPD among narrow diameter implants (NDI: ≥ 3.0 mm to < 3.75 mm) and regular diameter implants (RDI ≥ 3.75 mm to < 5 mm) were included. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized studies and to the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for non-randomized ones. A pair-wise meta-analysis was conducted on the included studies.

Results

Seven articles were included out of the 4291 identified from the digital research. Overall, a total of 939 implants were inserted (319 NDI, 620 RDI). Only one study was judged at serious risk of bias. No statistically significant difference was found in implant survival rate (risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI [0.98 to 1.04], P = 0.67)) while the difference was significant for BoP (mean difference 2.89 (95% CI [0.30 to 5.48] mm, P = 0.03)) with higher values for NDI. Higher MBL was identified among regular diameter implants (mean difference -0.15 mm (95% CI [-0.32 to 0.01 mm], P = 0.07). No statistically significant differences were identified for prosthetic survival and PPD.

Conclusions

No differences were found in implant survival rate between narrow and regular implants. A higher BoP was identified among narrow implants, but there was no higher bone loss. It is not possible to draw definitive conclusions about the use of narrow-diameter implants in the posterior region.

Available only for authorised users

Menini M, Pesce P, Baldi D, Coronel Vargas G, Pera P, Izzotti A. Prediction of titanium implant success by analysis of microRNA expression in peri-implant tissue. a 5-year follow-up study. JCM. 2019;8(6):888.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Menini M, Pesce P, Pera F, Baldi D, Pulliero A, Izzotti A. MicroRNAs in peri-implant crevicular fluid can predict peri-implant bone resorption: clinical trial with a 5-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2021;36(6):1148–57.CrossRefPubMed

Delucchi F, Pozzetti E, Bagnasco F, et al. Peri-implant tissue behaviour next to different titanium surfaces: 16-year post-trial follow-up. Appl Sci. 2021;11(20):9625. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11209625.CrossRef

Menini M, Delucchi F, Baldi D, Pera F, Bagnasco F, Pesce P. Macrophagic inflammatory response next to dental implants with different macro- and micro-structure: an in vitro study. Appl Sci. 2021;11(12):5324. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11125324.CrossRef

Menini M, Dellepiane E, Chvartszaid D, Baldi D, Schiavetti I, Pera P. Influence of different surface characteristics on peri-implant tissue behavior: a six-year prospective report. Int J Prosthodont. 2015;28(4):389–95.CrossRefPubMed

Saad M, Assaf A, Gerges E. The use of narrow diameter implants in the molar area. Int J Dent. 2016;2016:8253090.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Misch CE. implant design considerations for the posterior regions of the mouth. Implant Dent. 1999;8(4):376–86. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199904000-00008.CrossRefPubMed

Shemtov-Yona K, Rittel D, Levin L, Machtei EE. Effect of dental implant diameter on fatigue performance. part I: mechanical behavior: implant diameter and fatigue performance. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(2):172–7.CrossRefPubMed

Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Felice P, Karatzopoulos G, Worthington HV, Coulthard P. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment. cochrane oral health group, ed. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003607.pub4

10.

Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium. 1994;15(2):152, 154–156, 158 passim; quiz 162.

11.

McAllister BS, Haghighat K. Bone augmentation techniques. J Periodontol. 2007;78(3):377–96. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.060048.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Ilizarov GA. The Transosseous osteosynthesis: theoretical and clinical aspects of the regeneration and growth of tissue. Springer; 1992.

13.

Hämmerle CHF, Jung RE, Feloutzis A. A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients: implants in regenerated bone. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29:226–31. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-051X.29.s3.14.x.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Scipioni A, Bruschi GB, Calesini G. The edentuious ridge expansion technique: a five-year study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1994;14(5):451–9 PMID: 7751111.PubMed

15.

Blokhuis TJ, Arts JJC. Bioactive and osteoinductive bone graft substitutes: definitions, facts and myths. Injury. 2011;42:S26–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.010.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Tonetti MS, Hämmerle CHF, on behalf of the European Workshop on Periodontology Group C Advances in bone augmentation to enable dental implant placement: Consensus Report of the Sixth European Workshop on Periodontology. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:168-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01268.x

17.

Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Kwan S, Worthington HV, Coulthard P. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment. In: The Cochrane Collaboration, ed. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd CD003607.pub3. 2008

18.

Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Felice P, Karatzopoulos G, Worthington HV, Coulthard P. The efficacy of horizontal and vertical bone augmentation procedures for dental implants: a cochrane systematic review. In: Chiappelli F, ed. Evidence-Based Practice: Toward Optimizing Clinical Outcomes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2010;195–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05025-1_13

19.

Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(Suppl):237–59 (PMID: 19885448).PubMed

20.

Sierra-Sanchez JL, Martinez-Gonzalez A, Garcia-Sala Bonmati F, Manes-Ferrer JF, Brotons-Oliver A. Narrow-diameter implants: are they a predictable treatment option? a literature review. Med Oral. 2014;19(1):e74-81.CrossRef

21.

Al-Johany SS, Al Amri MD, Alsaeed S, Alalola B. Dental implant length and diameter: a proposed classification scheme: implants classification by length and diameter. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(3):252–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12517.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M. Implants (3.3 mm Diameter) for the rehabilitation of edentulous posterior Regions: a retrospective clinical study with up to 11 years of follow-up: narrow-diameter implants in posterior Regions of the jaws. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011;13(2):95–103.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Alrabiah M, Al Deeb M, Alsahhaf A, et al. Clinical and radiographic assessment of narrow-diameter and regular-diameter implants in the anterior and posterior jaw: 2 to 6 years of follow-up. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2020;50(2):97. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2020.50.2.97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Romeo E, Lops D, Amorfini L, Chiapasco M, Ghisolfi M, Vogel G. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.3-mm) implants followed for 1–7 years: a longitudinal study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(2):139–48.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Garlini G, Bianchi C, Chierichetti V, Sigurtà D, Maiorana C, Santoro F. Retrospective clinical study of Osseotite implants: zero- to 5-year results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(4):589–93 (PMID: 12939014).PubMed

26.

de Souza AB, Sukekava F, Tolentino L, César-Neto JB, Garcez-Filho J, Araújo MG. Narrow- and regular-diameter implants in the posterior region of the jaws to support single crowns: a 3-year split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2018;29(1):100–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13076.CrossRef

27.

Pieri F, Forlivesi C, Caselli E, Corinaldesi G. Narrow- (3.0 mm) versus standard-diameter (4.0 and 4.5 mm) implants for splinted partial fixed restoration of posterior mandibular and maxillary jaws: a 5-year retrospective cohort study. J Periodontol. 2017;88(4):338–47.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Al-Shibani N, Al-Aali KA, Al-Hamdan RS, Alrabiah M, Basunbul G, Abduljabbar T. Comparison of clinical peri-implant indices and crestal bone levels around narrow and regular diameter implants placed in diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a 3-year follow-up study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21(2):247–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12712.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Mangano FG, Shibli JA, Sammons RL, Iaculli F, Piattelli A, Mangano C. Short (8-mm) locking-taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior region: a prospective clinical study with 1-to 10-years of follow-up. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2014;25(8):933–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12181.CrossRef

30.

González-Valls G, Roca-Millan E, Céspedes-Sánchez JM, González-Navarro B, Torrejon-Moya A, López-López J. Narrow diameter dental implants as an alternative treatment for atrophic alveolar ridges. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Materials. 2021;14(12):3234. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14123234.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003;23(4):313–23 (PMID: 12956475).PubMed

32.

Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005;32(2):212–8.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(10):820–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00565.x.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Zinsli B, Sägesser T, Mericske E, Mericske-Stern R. Clinical evaluation of small-diameter ITI implants: a prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(1):92–9 (PMID: 14982361).PubMed

35.

Papadimitriou DEV, Friedland B, Gannam C, Salari S, Gallucci GO. Narrow-diameter versus standard-diameter implants and their effect on the need for guided bone regeneration: a virtual three-dimensional study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(6):1127–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12224.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Si M, Zhang Y, Li J, He F. Retrospective study on the clinical outcomes of small-diameter implants supporting fixed prostheses without bone augmentation in the posterior region after 2 to 12 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21(3):454–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12782.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Buser D, von Arx T. Surgical procedures in partially edentulous patients with ITI implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(Suppl 1):83–100. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011s1083.x.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Sohrabi K, Mushantat A, Esfandiari S, Feine J. How successful are small-diameter implants? a literature review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(5):515–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02410.x.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Ma M, Qi M, Zhang D, Liu H. The clinical performance of narrow diameter implants versus regular diameter implants: a meta-analysis. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2019;45(6):503–8. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-19-00025.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Assaf A, Saad M, Daas M, Abdallah J, Abdallah R. Use of narrow-diameter implants in the posterior jaw: a systematic review. Implant Dent. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000238.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Alrabiah M. Comparison of survival rate and crestal bone loss of narrow diameter dental implants versus regular dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Invest Clin Dent. 2019;10(1):e12367.CrossRef

42.

Menini M, Setti P, Pera P, Pera F, Pesce P. Peri-implant tissue health and bone resorption in patients with immediately loaded, implant-supported, full-arch prostheses. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31:327–33.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M, Corsi E, Anello T. Titanium-zirconium alloy narrow-diameter implants (Straumann Roxolid(®)) for the rehabilitation of horizontally deficient edentulous ridges: prospective study on 18 consecutive patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(10):1136–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02296.x.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Zhang YM, Chai F, Hornez JC, et al. The corrosion and biological behaviour of titanium alloys in the presence of human lymphoid cells and MC3T3-E1 osteoblasts. Biomed Mater. 2009;4(1).CrossRefPubMed

45.

Lee TJ, Ueno T, Nomura N, Wakabayashi N, Hanawa T. Titanium-zirconium binary alloy as dental implant material: analysis of the influence of compositional change on mechanical properties and in vitro biologic response. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(3):547–54.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Kobayashi E, Matsumoto S, Doi H, Yoneyama T, Hamanaka H. Mechanical properties of the binary titanium-zirconium alloys and their potential for biomedical materials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995;29(8):943–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820290805.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Gottlow J, Dard M, Kjellson F, Obrecht M, Sennerby L. Evaluation of a new titanium-zirconium dental implant: a biomechanical and histological comparative study in the mini pig. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(4):538–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00289.x.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Canullo L, Menini M, Santori G, Rakic M, Sculean A, Pesce P. Titanium abutment surface modifications and peri-implant tissue behavior: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24(3):1113–24.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Pesce P, Menini M, Santori G, Giovanni E, Bagnasco F, Canullo L. Photo and plasma activation of dental implant titanium surfaces. a systematic review with meta-analysis of pre-clinical studies. J Clin Med. 2020;9(9):2817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Pesce P, Menini M, Tommasato G, Patini R, Canullo L. Influence of modified titanium abutment surface on peri-implant soft tissue behaviour: a systematic review of histological findings. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2019;12(4):419–29.PubMed

Title: Influence of implant diameter on implant survival rate and clinical outcomes in the posterior area: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Paolo Pesce
Massimo Del Fabbro
Laura Modenese
Stefano Sandron
Luca Francetti
Gaetano Isola
Luigi Canullo
Maria Menini
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Bleeding on Probing
Published in: BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02962-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Influence of implant diameter on implant survival rate and clinical outcomes in the posterior area: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Patterns of nonsyndromic tooth agenesis and sexual dimorphism

Effect of orthodontic treatment on the periapical radiolucency of endodontically treated teeth: a CBCT analysis

Maxillary anterior segmental distraction osteogenesis to correct maxillary hypoplasia and dental crowding in cleft palate patients: a preliminary study

Oral cancer screening knowledge and practices among dental professionals at the University of Toronto

Synthesis and characterization of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles and their effects on remineralization of demineralized enamel in the presence of Er,Cr: YSGG laser irradiation

Theobromine versus casein phospho-peptides/Amorphous calcium phosphate with fluoride as remineralizing agents: effect on resin-dentine bond strength, microhardness, and morphology of dentine