Comparison of general and aesthetic effects between flapless and flap techniques in dental implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

被引:9
作者
Gao, Xiaomeng [1 ]
Qin, Siyu [1 ]
Cai, He [1 ]
Wan, Qianbing [1 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, State Key Lab Oral Dis, Natl Clin Res Ctr Oral Dis, Dept Prosthodont,West China Hosp Stomatol, 14,Sect 3,South Renmin Rd, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
关键词
Flapless; Flap; Aesthetics; Dental implants; Meta-analysis; KERATINIZED MUCOSA WIDTH; SINGLE-TOOTH IMPLANTS; CONTACT POINT; SURVIVAL RATE; FOLLOW-UP; SURGERY; BONE; PLACEMENT; DISTANCE; CREST;
D O I
10.1186/s40729-021-00380-5
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Background Information about the aesthetic effects of flapless in implant surgeries is scant. Differences of the survival rate (SR) and crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two techniques were also controversial. Thus, this review was aimed to compare the general and aesthetic effects of flapless and flap approaches in implant surgeries. Materials and methods Following the principals of PRISMA, literature databases were searched for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical performances of flap and flapless techniques. After that, relevant data of selected studies were pooled and analyzed to compare SR, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), visual analogue scale (VAS), papillae presentation index (PPI), keratinized mucosa (KM) width and CBL between the two techniques. Results Fourteen RCTs were included. No significant difference was found in SR (RR = - 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) (- 0.05, 0.04)), BOP (OR = 0.40, 95% CI (0.15, 1.02)), KM width (WMD = - 0.42, 95% CI (- 1.02, 0.17)) between two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that the difference of CBL was insignificant in two groups (WMD = - 0.13, 95% CI (- 0.63, 0.38)). However, flap techniques would lead more peri-implant PD (WMD = - 0.37, 95% CI (- 0.51, - 0.23)). Subgroup analysis also indicated lower VAS scores in flapless group after 1 day (WMD = - 1.66, 95% CI (- 2.16, - 1.16)) but comparable pain experience after 3 days (WMD = - 0.59, 95% CI (- 1.33, 0.16)). Mean difference of PPI (WMD = 0.32, 95% CI (0.28, 0.35)) between the two groups was significant. Conclusions The flapless procedure showed a superiority in preserving gingival papillae, reducing postoperative pain and peri-implant PD compared to the flap procedure, while exhibiting comparable effects on SR, BOP, KW width changes and CBL. Flapless technique is more recommended at the ideal soft and hard tissue implanting sites.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]   Effect of Flapless Surgery on Single-Tooth Implants in the Esthetic Zone: A Randomized Clinical Trial [J].
Bashutski, Jill D. ;
Wang, Hom-Lay ;
Rudek, Ivan ;
Moreno, Ildefonso ;
Koticha, Tapan ;
Oh, Tae-Ju .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2013, 84 (12) :1747-1754
[2]   Outcome of early dental implant placement versus other dental implant placement protocols: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Bassir, Seyed Hossein ;
El Kholy, Karim ;
Chen, Chia-Yu ;
Lee, Kyu Ha ;
Intini, Giuseppe .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2019, 90 (05) :493-506
[3]   Morphogenesis of the peri-implant mucosa: an experimental study in dogs [J].
Berglundh, Tord ;
Abrahamsson, Ingemar ;
Welander, Maria ;
Lang, Niklaus P. ;
Lindhe, Jan .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2007, 18 (01) :1-8
[4]   Implant placement in fresh extraction sockets [J].
Blanco, Juan ;
Carral, Cristina ;
Argibay, Olalla ;
Linares, Antonio .
PERIODONTOLOGY 2000, 2019, 79 (01) :151-167
[5]  
Bömicke W, 2017, EUR J ORAL IMPLANTOL, V10, P179
[6]   10-Year Survival and Success Rates of 511 Titanium Implants with a Sandblasted and Acid-Etched Surface: A Retrospective Study in 303 Partially Edentulous Patients [J].
Buser, Daniel ;
Janner, Simone F. M. ;
Wittneben, Julia-Gabriela ;
Braegger, Urs ;
Ramseier, Christoph A. ;
Salvi, Giovanni E. .
CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2012, 14 (06) :839-851
[7]   Long-term clinical performance of flapless implant surgery compared to the conventional approach with flap elevation: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Cai, He ;
Liang, Xing ;
Sun, Dong-Yuan ;
Chen, Jun-Yu .
WORLD JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CASES, 2020, 8 (06) :1087-1103
[8]  
Campelo LD, 2002, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V17, P271
[9]  
Cannizzaro G, 2011, EUR J ORAL IMPLANTOL, V4, P177
[10]   Esthetic assessments in implant dentistry: objective and subjective criteria for clinicians and patients [J].
Cosyn, Jan ;
Thoma, Daniel S. ;
Hammerle, Christoph H. F. ;
De Bruyn, Hugo .
PERIODONTOLOGY 2000, 2017, 73 (01) :193-202