Follow-up study of implant-tooth supported fixed dental prosthesis versus free-standing implant supported fixed dental prosthesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify studies which compared tooth implant supported fixed dental prosthesis and exclusively implant supported fixed dental prosthesis for assessments of implant failure, prosthesis failure, abutment tooth failure and other biological and mechanical failuresA cumulative electronic and manual search were performed, and one hundred and forty-three articles published before May/June 2021 were identified. Out of these ninety-six were excluded and finally seven articles that met the inclusion criteria was included in the review.A database was established into which information extracted from each paper was tabulated. For the parameter of prosthetic stability. Overall relative risk calculated was 1.0328 with confidence interval of 0.9747 to 1.0987. p-value was 0.2623 and it was not significant. ANOVA test was run on the results which yielded f-ratio value of 0.49412 and accordingly the p-value is 0.49. Although marginal bone loss was less in tooth implant group, but the results were not significant at p < .05. Many authors were not clear about the implant failure in treatment groups. Overall, 20 implants failed in the study. 7 patients had some sort of sensory disturbance in mental region in Gunne’s and Olssun’s study.Within the limitations of the current meta-analysis and systematic review, it is suggested that implant tooth supported fixed dental prosthesis can be an alternative and viable treatment option for the replacement of partially edentulous patient since no significant difference was observed in two designs of the prostheses.