A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of resin-bonded bridges after an observation period of at least 5 years

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this systematic review were to assess the 5-year survival of resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) and to describe the incidence of technical and biological complications. METHODS: An electronic Medline search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on RBBs with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Patients had to have been examined clinically at the follow-up visit. Assessment of the identified studies and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poissons regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions. RESULTS: The search provided 6110 titles and 214 abstracts. Full-text analysis was performed for 93 articles, resulting in 17 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of these studies indicated an estimated survival of RBBs of 87.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 81.6-91.9%) after 5 years. The most frequent complication was debonding (loss of retention), which occurred in 19.2% (95% CI: 13.8-26.3%) of RBBs over an observation period of 5 years. The annual debonding rate for RBBs placed on posterior teeth (5.03%) tended to be higher than that for anterior-placed RBBs (3.05%). This difference, however, did not reach statistical significance (P=0.157). Biological complications, like caries on abutments and RBBs lost due to periodontitis, occurred in 1.5% of abutments and 2.1% of RBBs, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the high survival rate of RBBs, technical complications like debonding are frequent. This in turn means that a substantial amount of extra chair time may be needed following the incorporation of RBBs. There is thus an urgent need for studies with a follow-up time of 10 years or more, to evaluate the long-term outcomes.

A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. Part II: transalveolar technique

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this systematic review were to assess the survival rate of implants placed in sites with transalveolar sinus floor elevation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on transalveolar sinus floor elevation, with a mean follow-up time of at least 1 year after functional loading. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates/ year proportions. RESULTS: The search provided 849 titles. Full-text analysis was performed for 176 articles, resulting in 19 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of these studies indicated an estimated annual failure rate of 2.48% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.37-4.49%) translating to an estimated survival rate of 92.8% (95% CI): 87.4-96.0%) for implants placed in transalveolarly augmented sinuses, after 3 years in function. Furthermore, subject-based analysis revealed an estimated annual failure of 3.71% (95% CI: 1.21-11.38%), translating to 10.5% (95% CI: 3.6-28.9%) of the subjects experiencing implant loss over 3 years. CONCLUSION: Survival rates of implants placed in transalveolar sinus floor augmentation sites are comparable to those in non-augmented sites. This technique is predictable with a low incidence of complications during and post-operatively.

A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this systematic review were to assess the survival rate of grafts and implants placed with sinus floor elevation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted to identify studies on sinus floor elevation, with a mean follow-up time of at least 1 year after functional loading. RESULTS: The search provided 839 titles. Full-text analysis was performed for 175 articles resulting in 48 studies that met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 12,020 implants. Meta-analysis indicated an estimated annual failure rate of 3.48% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.48%-4.88%] translating into a 3-year implant survival of 90.1% (95% CI: 86.4%-92.8%). However, when failure rates was analyzed on the subject level, the estimated annual failure was 6.04% (95% CI: 3.87%-9.43%) translating into 16.6% (95% CI: 10.9%-24.6%) of the subjects experiencing implant loss over 3 years. CONCLUSION: The insertion of dental implants in combination with maxillary sinus floor elevation is a predictable treatment method showing high implant survival rates and low incidences of surgical complications. The best results (98.3% implant survival after 3 years) were obtained using rough surface implants with membrane coverage of the lateral window.

Survival and failure rates of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices: a systematic review

AIM: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature on the survival rates of palatal implants, Onplants((R)), miniplates and mini screws. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic MEDLINE search supplemented by manual searching was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies on palatal implants, Onplants((R)), miniplates and miniscrews with a mean follow-up time of at least 12 weeks and of at least 10 units per modality having been examined clinically at a follow-up visit. Assessment of studies and data abstraction was performed independently by two reviewers. Reported failures of used devices were analyzed using random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of failure and survival proportions. RESULTS: The search up to January 2009 provided 390 titles and 71 abstracts with full-text analysis of 34 articles, yielding 27 studies that met the inclusion criteria. In meta-analysis, the failure rate for Onplants((R)) was 17.2% (95% CI: 5.9-35.8%), 10.5% for palatal implants (95% CI: 6.1-18.1%), 16.4% for miniscrews (95% CI: 13.4-20.1%) and 7.3% for miniplates (95% CI: 5.4-9.9%). Miniplates and palatal implants, representing torque-resisting temporary anchorage devices (TADs), when grouped together, showed a 1.92-fold (95% CI: 1.06-2.78) lower clinical failure rate than miniscrews. CONCLUSION: Based on the available evidence in the literature, palatal implants and miniplates showed comparable survival rates of >or=90% over a period of at least 12 weeks, and yielded superior survival than miniscrews. Palatal implants and miniplates for temporary anchorage provide reliable absolute orthodontic anchorage. If the intended orthodontic treatment would require multiple miniscrew placement to provide adequate anchorage, the reliability of such systems is questionable. For patients who are undergoing extensive orthodontic treatment, force vectors may need to be varied or the roots of the teeth to be moved may need to slide past the anchors. In this context, palatal implants or miniplates should be the TADs of choice.

Mechanical and technical risks in implant therapy

PURPOSE: To systematically appraise the impact of mechanical/technical risk factors on implant-supported reconstructions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A MEDLINE (PubMed) database search from 1966 to April 2008 was conducted. The search strategy was a combination of MeSH terms and the key words: design, dental implant(s), risk, prosthodontics, fixed prosthodontics, fixed partial denture(s), fixed dental prosthesis (FDP), fixed reconstruction(s), oral rehabilitation, bridge(s), removable partial denture(s), overdenture(s). Randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective cohort studies with a mean follow-up of at least 4 years were included. The material evaluated in each study had to include cases with/without exposure to the risk factor. RESULTS: From 3,568 articles, 111 were selected for full text analysis. Of the 111 articles, 33 were included for data extraction after grouping the outcomes into 10 risk factors: type of retentive elements supporting overdentures, presence of cantilever extension(s), cemented versus screw-retained FDPs, angled/angulated abutments, bruxism, crown/implant ratio, length of the suprastructure, prosthetic materials, number of implants supporting an FDP, and history of mechanical/technical complications. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of a metal framework in overdentures, the presence of cantilever extension(s) > 15 mm and of bruxism, the length of the reconstruction, and a history of repeated complications were associated with increased mechanical/technical complications. The type of retention, the presence of angled abutments, the crown-implant ratio, and the number of implants supporting an FDP were not associated with increased mechanical/technical complications. None of the mechanical/technical risk factors had an impact on implant survival and success rates.

Handbook of Intermediality

This handbook offers students and researchers compact orientation in their study of intermedial phenomena in Anglophone literary texts and cultures by introducing them to current academic debates, theoretical concepts and methodologies. By combining theory with text analysis and contextual anchoring, it introduces students and scholars alike to a vast field of research which encompasses concepts such as intermediality, multi- and plurimediality, intermedial reference, transmediality, ekphrasis, as well as related concepts such as visual culture, remediation, adaptation, and multimodality, which are all discussed in connection with literary examples. Hence each of the 30 contributions spans both a theoretical approach and concrete analysis of literary texts from different centuries and different Anglophone cultures.

From text to codings: intercoder reliability assessment in qualitative content analysis

BACKGROUND: High intercoder reliability (ICR) is required in qualitative content analysis for assuring quality when more than one coder is involved in data analysis. The literature is short of standardized procedures for ICR procedures in qualitative content analysis. OBJECTIVE: To illustrate how ICR assessment can be used to improve codings in qualitative content analysis. METHODS: Key steps of the procedure are presented, drawing on data from a qualitative study on patients' perspectives on low back pain. RESULTS: First, a coding scheme was developed using a comprehensive inductive and deductive approach. Second, 10 transcripts were coded independently by two researchers, and ICR was calculated. A resulting kappa value of .67 can be regarded as satisfactory to solid. Moreover, varying agreement rates helped to identify problems in the coding scheme. Low agreement rates, for instance, indicated that respective codes were defined too broadly and would need clarification. In a third step, the results of the analysis were used to improve the coding scheme, leading to consistent and high-quality results. DISCUSSION: The quantitative approach of ICR assessment is a viable instrument for quality assurance in qualitative content analysis. Kappa values and close inspection of agreement rates help to estimate and increase quality of codings. This approach facilitates good practice in coding and enhances credibility of analysis, especially when large samples are interviewed, different coders are involved, and quantitative results are presented.