RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Several anatomical and histological limitations can complicate implant placement, angulated implant positioning appeared to compensate these limitations. However several studies suggested a higher rate of marginal bone loss and implant failure regarding tilted implants in comparison with conventional implant. Therefore this umbrella review aims to summarize and analyze all the evidence available concerning marginal bone loss and implant failure between tilted and axial implants. METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted, without any language restrictions and only systematic reviews with meta-analysis or meta-analysis studies were included. The outcomes assessed in this review were implant failure and marginal bone loss in mm. Relative risks (RRs) and the differences of the mean (MD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) regarding implant failure and marginal bone loss respectively. RESULTS: in total 8 studies were included, based on the short-term results, a non-significant mean difference (MD=0.00; 95% Cl; -0.01-0.02; p-value = 0.75) was recorded between tilted and axial implants supporting full-arch dentures, meanwhile a significant mean difference was recorded on a 3 years and long term follow-up reached (MD= 0.08 95% Cl = 0.05-0.11; p value<0.00001)) and (MD= 0.18; 95% Cl= 0.15-0.20; p value< 0.00001) respectively, and an insignificant difference was observed between tilted and axial implants regarding implant failure (RR=1.02; 95% Cl=0.85-1.23; p value= 0.81) Conclusion: this review based on high and moderated quality studies with low risk of bias demonstrated no significant outcome was observed between tilted implants supporting full-arch or fixed partial denture and axial implants regarding implant failure.
RESUMO
Objectives: This study aimed to present the results and analyses of clinical trials, including updates on the different functions of root canal sealers. Materials and Methods: In June 2023, we performed a comprehensive search of ClinicalTrials.gov to identify interventional clinical trials pertaining to root canal sealers. In total, 23 clinical trials conducted up to June 2023 were included in this study. Results: Approximately half of the trials (11 out of 23) were completed, while none were terminated or withdrawn. Each included trial had a minimum of 10 participants, with 11 trials having more than 100 participants. None of the assessed trials provided outcomes, and the majority (17 out of 23) lacked associated publications. In terms of geographic distribution, the USA and Canada did not contribute to any root canal sealer trials. Conclusions: This study highlights the lack of diversity in trial locations, the absence of reported results, and a scarcity of clinical trials examining the physicochemical properties of different sealers. Most published trials primarily focused on assessing the post-operative pain effect of these sealers, but no significant difference was found regarding post-operative pain control.
