Search

Objective: To evaluate the long-term survival and success rates of implants placed in reconstructed areas using microvascularized or non-microvascularized extraoral bone grafts., Materials and Methods: An electronic search was performed in five databases and in gray literature for articles published until June, 2023. The eligibility criteria comprised observational studies (prospective or retrospective) and clinical trials, reporting survival and success rates of implants placed in extraoral bone grafts. A meta-analysis (implant failure) was categorized into subgroups based on the type of bone graft used. The risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale., Results: Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up time was 92 months. The summary estimate of survival rate at the implant level were 94.9% (CI: 90.1%-97.4%) for non-vascularized iliac graft, 96.5% (CI: 91.4%-98.6%) for non-vascularized calvaria graft, and 92.3% (CI: 89.1%-94.6%) for vascularized fibula graft. The mean success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) were 83.2%; 2.25 mm, 92.2%; 0.93 mm, and 87.6%; 1.49 mm, respectively., Conclusions: Implants placed in areas reconstructed using extraoral autogenous bone graft have high long-term survival rates and low long-term MBLs. The data did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in the survival, success, or MBL of grafts from different donor areas or with different vascularization. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202390004., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: To compare the fracture load of two framework materials, zirconia and a new fiber-reinforced composite (FRC), for full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations using various cross- sections., Material and Methods: A cobalt-chromium metal model simulating the all-on-four concept and including 2 anterior straight and 2 posterior 45- degree angled multi-unit digital implant analogs was manufactured. 4 straight multi-unit abutments were screwed onto the implant analogs. The metallic model was scanned, and 18 frameworks were fabricated, consisting of 9 made of zirconia and 9 made of fiber-reinforced composite (FRC). The frameworks were then divided into 6 groups, with each group consisting of 3 frameworks (n=3). Group division was based on material type (Zirconia or FRC Trilor) and framework cross-section: 3.5 x 6 mm2, 5.5 x 6 mm2, or 7.5 x 6 mm2. All specimens underwent thermocycling in 2 baths (5 ͦ c- 55 ͦ c for 2350 cycles). Subsequently, the frameworks were cemented to the abutments of the metal model and subjected to a load-to-failure bending test at 3 different points using a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 1 mm/min) until complete fracture occurred (according to ISO/TS 11405:2015). Descriptive statistics were used to present quantitative variables as means ± standard deviations. To compare two means, Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney test was utilized, and for three means, ANOVA test was used., Results: The FRC group with a 7.5 x 6 mm2 cross-section exhibited the highest load-to-failure values (ranging from 1020 N to 2994N) , while the zirconia group with a 3.5 x 6 mm2 cross-section recorded the lowest values (ranging from 212 N to 1287 N). The material type and framework cross-section significantly affected the mean load-to-fracture values (p< 0.05). Regardless of the framework cross-section, the FRC group exhibited higher fracture loads than the zirconia group. In both materials, fracture load values were increased with larger framework cross-sectional areas, with the highest values observed at the inter-implant midpoint., Conclusion: The FRC Trilor demonstrated a fracture load that make it a suitable alternative to zirconia for all-on-four implant prosthetic frameworks.

This systematic review (SR) aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial potential of different types of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) often used in regenerative treatments. An electronic search was performed in four databases and in Gray literature for articles published until January, 2023. The eligibility criteria comprised in vitro studies that evaluated the antimicrobial effect of different types of PRF. For the analysis of the risk of bias within studies, the modified OHAT (Office of Health Assessment and Translation) tool was used. For the evaluation of the results, a qualitative critical analysis was carried out in the synthesis of the results of the primary studies. Sixteen studies published between 2013 and 2021 were included in this SR. The antimicrobial effects of PRF variations (PRF, injectable PRF [I-PRF], PRF with silver nanoparticles [agNP-PRF], and horizontal PRF [H-PRF]), were analyzed against 16 types of bacteria from the oral, periodontal, and endodontic environments. All types of PRF showed significant antimicrobial action, with the antibacterial efficacy being more expressive than the fungal one. The I-PRF, H-PRF, and agNP-PRF subtypes improve antimicrobial activity. According to the OHAT analysis, no study was classified as having a high risk of bias. Evidence suggests that PRF variations have significant antimicrobial activity, with bacterial action being greater than fungal. Evolutions such as I-PRF, H-PRF, and agNP-PRF improve antimicrobial activity. Future studies analyzing the clinical effect of these platelets are fundamental. This SR was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202340016., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)