Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This systematic review evaluates occlusion variations in posterior implant-supported fixed prostheses, suggesting long-term monitoring is crucial.
This systematic review and meta- analysis aimed to evaluate the occlusion variations in single posterior implant supported fixed prostheses. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and the study was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) platform (CRD42024501657). A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases published until December 2024 was done by 2 independent reviewers, without restriction of language or publication date. A meta-analysis was performed using the R version 4.0.2, considering the significance level P < .05. Quality assessments were performed using the ROBINS-I tool. Five studies were included, totaling 150 participants and 146 posterior single implant-supported fixed prostheses evaluated over time. The meta-analyses were performed with different follow-up months to evaluate the means in percentage the occlusal variations: 0,5 months (5,91%); 3 months (7,70%); 6 months (8,29%); 12 months (13,01%); 24 months (14,31%); 36 months (19,41%). Significant difference (P < .05) was presented from 12 months of follow-up. Implant-supported prostheses present occlusal variations after installation, with a progressive increase over time, being significant after 12 months of installation. Therefore, careful long-term monitoring of occlusion is essential, with occlusal adjustments being considered when necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bento et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: