| Purpose:Ultrasonic implant site preparation(UISP)has been introduced to overcome some setbacks of conventional implant site preparation(CISP).According to the contemporary controversy about the clinical effects of two implant site preparation(ISP)techniques,we perform this systematic review to comprehensively evaluate the clinical effects of ultrasonic implant site preparation and CISP on implant stability,operating time and implant survival rate,with the aim to provide a systematic,scientific,and evidence-based medicine for clinical decision making by dental implant doctors.Materials and Methods:Based on the included and excluded criteria,two reviewers independently performed an extensive electronic search in PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Collaboration Library,Web of Science,CNKI and Wangfa databases from foundation time up to February 2018 complemented by manual searches.After the data extraction and quality assessment of eligible articles,RevMan 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.Result:After searching and screening literature,a total of six publications were included.140 implants were made by UISP,139 implants for CISP,respectively.This meta-analysis showed that there were no significant difference between two surgery techniques regarding the primary stability(P=0.54)and implant survival ratios at the third month(P=0.47).Although the UISP method took longer than the CISP method,the difference between the two methods was not statistically significant(P=0.05).Moreover,statistical difference existed in the implant stability both at the first month(P=0.04)and third month(P=0.02)in favor of UISP.Conclusion:With the limitations of this review,there were no statistically significant differences on the implant primary stability,survival rate,and the operating time of the two ISP methods.UISP could obtain better secondary stability,which requires more high-quality,large-sample randomized controlled trials to support the predictability of immediate or early restoration. |
PDF Full Text Request