Effect of Crown-to-implant Ratio on the Marginal Bone Level Changes and Implant Survival - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal J Oral Biol Craniofac Res

Publisher Elsevier

Date 2020 Oct 19

PMID 33072508

Citations 5

Authors

Ninad Milind Padhye

Tabrez Lakha

Nadja Naenni

Mohit Kheur

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the existing evidence regarding the effect of crown-to-implant ratio (CIR) on the peri-implant crestal bone level change and implant survival. Randomized controlled clinical trials, prospective as well as retrospective studies with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months and 10 patients per group were included for this systematic review. Statistical analysis was performed to determine CIR effects on the peri-implant marginal bone level changes and implant survival. A total of 28 articles (14 prospective studies and 14 retrospective studies) from a database of 201 articles, with 2097 patients and 4350 implants, were included. A mean CIR ranging from 0.6 to 2.44 was presented by the study groups. A weighted mean implant loss of 0.19% per year and peri-implant marginal bone level change of 0.63 mm ± 0.55 over 46.8 ± 5.2 months was calculated from the included studies. The peri-implant marginal bone level change ( = 0.155) and the rate of implant loss ( = 0.245) showed a statistically insignificant difference between implant restorations of a high (>1.5:1) and low (<1.5:1) CIR. Within its limitations, this review concludes that a high (>1.5:1) or a low (<1.5:1) CIR does not significantly affect the peri-implant marginal bone level change and implant survival rate. However, until further evidence becomes available, extrapolation to long term clinical success cannot be ascertained.

Citing Articles

Analysis of risk indicators for implant failure in patients with chronic periodontitis.

Zhang Q, Guo S, Li Y, Li Z, Wang D, Zhang K BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):1051.

PMID: 39245715 PMC: 11382459. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04806-5.

Influence of Crown Height and Width on Marginal Bone Loss and Long-Term Stability of Dental Implants: A Systematic Review.

Jain R, Pisulkar S, Dubey S, Bansod A, Beri A, Deshmukh S Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e65109.

PMID: 39171029 PMC: 11338648. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.65109.

Survival Rates of Short Dental Implants (≤6 mm) Used as an Alternative to Longer (>6 mm) Implants for the Rehabilitation of Posterior Partial Edentulism: A Systematic Review of RCTs.

Emfietzoglou R, Dereka X Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(6).

PMID: 38920886 PMC: 11202938. DOI: 10.3390/dj12060185.

Prosthetic Design Factors Influencing Peri-Implant Disease: A Comprehensive Review.

Chankhore P, Khubchandani S, Reche A, Paul P Cureus. 2024; 15(11):e48737.

PMID: 38699657 PMC: 11065393. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48737.

Short versus Standard Length Implants with Sinus Floor Elevation for the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla.

Schiegnitz E, Hill N, Sagheb K, Konig J, Sagheb K, Al-Nawas B Acta Stomatol Croat. 2022; 56(2):143-153.

PMID: 35821724 PMC: 9262115. DOI: 10.15644/asc56/2/5.

References

Gulje F, Raghoebar G, Vissink A, Meijer H . Single crowns in the resorbed posterior maxilla supported by either 6-mm implants or by 11-mm implants combined with sinus floor elevation surgery: a 1-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014; 7(3):247-55. View

Krennmair G, Schmidinger S, Waldenberger O . Single-tooth replacement with the Frialit-2 system: a retrospective clinical analysis of 146 implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17(1):78-85. View

Srinivasan M, Vazquez L, Rieder P, Moraguez O, Bernard J, Belser U . Survival rates of short (6 mm) micro-rough surface implants: a review of literature and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 25(5):539-45. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12125. View

Danza M, Grecchi F, Zollino I, Casadio C, Carinci F . Spiral implants bearing full-arch rehabilitation: analysis of clinical outcome. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 37(4):447-55. DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00140.1. View

Pieri F, Aldini N, Fini M, Marchetti C, Corinaldesi G . Preliminary 2-year report on treatment outcomes for 6-mm-long implants in posterior atrophic mandibles. Int J Prosthodont. 2012; 25(3):279-89. View

das Neves F, Fones D, Bernardes S, Prado C, Fernandes Neto A . Short implants--an analysis of longitudinal studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006; 21(1):86-93. View

Villarinho E, Triches D, Alonso F, Mezzomo L, Teixeira E, Shinkai R . Risk factors for single crowns supported by short (6-mm) implants in the posterior region: A prospective clinical and radiographic study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017; 19(4):671-680. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12494. View

Garaicoa-Pazmino C, Suarez-Lopez Del Amo F, Monje A, Catena A, Ortega-Oller I, Galindo-Moreno P . Influence of crown/implant ratio on marginal bone loss: a systematic review. J Periodontol. 2014; 85(9):1214-21. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2014.130615. View

Rangert B, Sullivan R, Jemt T . Load factor control for implants in the posterior partially edentulous segment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997; 12(3):360-70. View

10.

Glantz P, Nilner K . Biomechanical aspects of prosthetic implant-borne reconstructions. Periodontol 2000. 1999; 17:119-24. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00129.x. View

11.

Mangano F, Frezzato I, Frezzato A, Veronesi G, Mortellaro C, Mangano C . The Effect of Crown-to-Implant Ratio on the Clinical Performance of Extra-Short Locking-Taper Implants. J Craniofac Surg. 2016; 27(3):675-81. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000002562. View

12.

Noack N, Willer J, Hoffmann J . Long-term results after placement of dental implants: longitudinal study of 1,964 implants over 16 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14(5):748-55. View

13.

Kitamura E, Stegaroiu R, Nomura S, Miyakawa O . Biomechanical aspects of marginal bone resorption around osseointegrated implants: considerations based on a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004; 15(4):401-12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01022.x. View

14.

Tawil G, AbouJaoude N, Younan R . Influence of prosthetic parameters on the survival and complication rates of short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006; 21(2):275-82. View

15.

Rossi F, Botticelli D, Cesaretti G, De Santis E, Storelli S, Lang N . Use of short implants (6 mm) in a single-tooth replacement: a 5-year follow-up prospective randomized controlled multicenter clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 27(4):458-64. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12564. View

16.

Sahrmann P, Naenni N, Jung R, Held U, Truninger T, Hammerle C . Success of 6-mm Implants with Single-Tooth Restorations: A 3-year Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. J Dent Res. 2016; 95(6):623-8. DOI: 10.1177/0022034516633432. View

17.

Schneider D, Witt L, Hammerle C . Influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio on the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations: a cross-sectional retrospective 5-year investigation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 23(2):169-174. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02230.x. View

18.

Nisand D, Renouard F . Short implant in limited bone volume. Periodontol 2000. 2014; 66(1):72-96. DOI: 10.1111/prd.12053. View

19.

Anitua E, Pinas L, Orive G . Retrospective study of short and extra-short implants placed in posterior regions: influence of crown-to-implant ratio on marginal bone loss. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013; 17(1):102-10. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12073. View

20.

Birdi H, Schulte J, Kovacs A, Weed M, Chuang S . Crown-to-implant ratios of short-length implants. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 36(6):425-33. DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00071. View