Peri-implant bone loss in cement- and screw-retained prostheses: Systematic review and meta-analysis

• Published in: Journal of clinical periodontology 2013-03, Vol.40 (3), p.287-295
• Main Authors: de Brandão, Marcelo L., Vettore, Mario V., Vidigal Júnior, Guaracilei M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Alveolar Bone Loss - etiology; Bone loss; Bones; cement-retained prosthesis; Cementation - methods; Dental Cements - chemistry; Dental Implant-Abutment Design; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention - instrumentation; Dental Prosthesis Retention - methods; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dentistry; Humans; Meta-analysis; peri-implant bone loss; Peri-Implantitis - etiology; Prostheses; screw-retained prosthesis; Systematic review
• ISSN: 0303-6979; 1600-051X
• DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12041

Aim The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to assess and compare peri‐implant marginal bone loss in cement‐ and screw‐retained prostheses. Material and Methods Electronic database and manual searches were undertaken to identify trials, prospective or retrospective studies reporting on radiographic marginal bone loss around dental implants restored with cement‐ and/or screw‐retained prostheses. Two reviewers independently conducted the article selection and data extraction. Random‐effects models were used to obtain estimates of peri‐implant marginal bone loss [mean, 95% confidence intervals (CI)]. Results Of the 1217 identified studies, nine finally met the inclusion criteria. Only two studies included both cement‐ and screw‐retained prostheses, three assessed only screw‐retained prostheses, and four evaluated only cement‐retained prostheses. Pooled mean marginal bone loss was 0.53 mm (CI 95%, 0.31–0.76 mm) for cement‐retained prostheses and 0.89 mm (CI 95%, 0.45–1.33 mm) for screw‐retained prostheses. Conclusion There is no evidence to support differences in the marginal bone loss through indirect comparison between cement and screw‐retained restorations.