Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine systematically the data published on the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures from the patient's perspective. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and The Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database were searched and complemented by hand searching. All randomized-controlled trials published in English or French up to April 2007 were included, in which conventional dentures and mandibular implant overdentures in adult edentulous individuals were compared. The outcomes of interest were patient satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life. Random effects models were used to pool the effect sizes (ES) of all included studies. RESULTS: Ten publications of seven randomized-controlled trials were identified and eight were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with mandibular conventional dentures, implant overdentures were rated to be more satisfactory at a clinically relevant level pooled ES 0.80, z=3.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36-1.24, P=0.0004, but a statistical heterogeneity was found (chi(2)=31.63, df=5, P<0.00001, I(2)=84%). The pooled ES for oral health quality of life was -0.41 (z=1.31, 95% CI, -1.02 to 0.20; P=0.19, chi(2)=11.53, df=2, P<0.003, I(2)=83%). There was a lack of evidence to show the impact of mandibular implant overdenture on perceived general health. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, although mandibular implant-retained overdentures may be more satisfying for edentulous patients than new conventional dentures, the magnitude of the effect is still uncertain. There is a need for additional evidence including cost-effectiveness analyses on the impact of mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures.
Emami et al. (Fri,) studied this question.