种植体间距对种植体周骨吸收影响的Meta分析

A meta-analysis of interimplant distance on peri-implant bone resorption

目的通过系统评价及Meta分析的方法评估种植体间距(interimplant distance,IID)对种植体周骨吸收的影响。方法电子检索截至2022年3月PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、CNKI、万方数据库有关不同IID对种植体周骨吸收影响的人群或动物研究,且对关键文献进行引文索引。结果共9篇研究符合纳入标准,其中动物研究7篇,临床试验2篇。以3 mm作为标准IID,Meta分析结果:动物研究中IID=2 mm和IID=3 mm的边缘骨吸收量没有统计学差异[MD=0.05,95%CI(-0.10,0.19),P=0.54];临床试验表明IID=2 mm时的边缘骨吸收量稍大于3 mm,但没有统计学意义[MD=0.11,95%CI(-0.09,0.31),P=0.27]。IID=2 mm或3 mm时的垂直骨吸收量没有统计学差异[MD=-0.10,95%CI(-0.27,0.07),P=0.24]。结论基于有限的证据,与IID=3 mm相比,IID=2 mm的表现与之相似。仍需要细化评估组别、改善评估方式,进一步证实IID与种植体周骨吸收的关系。

Objective To systematically evaluate the effect of interimplant distance(IID)on peri-implant bone resorption by systematic evaluation and meta-analysis.Methods Databases in PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,Web of Science,CNKI and Wanfang Date until March 2022 were searched to identify animal studies or population studies that comparing peri-implant bone resorption at different IID,and citation indexes were carried out for the critical literatures.Results A total of 9 studies were included,including 7 animal studies and 2 clinical trials.Using 3 mm as the standard IID,metaanalysis indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in marginal bone resorption between IID=2 mm and IID=3 mm of animal studies[MD=0.05,95%CI(-0.10,0.19),P=0.54];Clinical trials showed slightly greater marginal bone resorption at IID=2 mm than at IID=3 mm,which is not statistically significant[MD=0.11,95%CI(-0.09,0.31),P=0.27].There was no statistically significant difference in vertical bone resorption at IID=2 mm or 3 mm[MD=-0.10,95%CI(-0.27,0.07),P=0.24].Conclusions Based on the limited evidence,performance was similar for IID=2 mm compared to IID=3 mm.There is still a need to refine the assessment groups,improve the assessment methods and further confirm the relationship between IID and peri-implant bone resorption.