MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sandblasted and cleansed planar titanium specimens with a size of 5 × 5 × 1 mm were coated on one side with 0.25 vol% eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). The other side of the specimens was kept highly polished (the control side). These specimens were inserted in rabbit mandibles. Twelve rabbits were randomly assigned into three study groups (n = 4). The rabbits were sacrificed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. The harvested specimens with the implants were assessed for new bone formation on both sides of the implant using CBCT, conventional radiographs, and the biaxial pullout test. The results were statistically analyzed by a nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test and Friedman's test as multiple comparisons and by Brunner-Langer nonparametric mixed model approach (R Software).
RESULTS: A significant osteoconductive bone formation was found on the EPA-coated Ti implant surface (P < 0.05) at 8 weeks when compared to the polished surface (control). Biaxial pullout test results showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) after 8 and 12 weeks with a maximum force of 243.8 N, compared to 143.25 N after 4 week.
CONCLUSION: EPA implant coating promoted osteoconduction on the Ti implant surfaces, enhancing the anchorage of the implant to the surrounding bone in white New Zealand rabbits.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-four patients (mean age 60.70 ± 8.7 years) received telescopic crown or locator attachments for ISOD and completed OHIP-14 (Malaysian version) and DS questionnaires, at baseline (T0 ) with new conventional complete dentures (CCD) and 3 months (T1 ) and 3 years (T2 ) after ISOD conversion. Mandibular bone volume was calculated from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) datasets using Mimics software. Mean changes (MC) in OHIP-14 and DS at intervals were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and effect size (ES). The association of bone volume, implant attachment type, and other patient variables with the change in OHIP-14 and DS were determined using multivariate linear regression analysis.
RESULTS: The MC in OHIP-14 and DS scores from T0 to T1 and T2 showed significant improvement with moderate and large ES, respectively. Regression analyses for the change in OHIP-14 score from T0 to T2 showed significant association with implant attachment type (P = 0.043), bone volume (P = 0.004), and baseline OHIP-14 (P = 0.001), while for DS, the association was only significant with baseline DS score (P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Improvement in patients' OHRQoL and satisfaction with ISOD was associated with their baseline ratings. Mandibular bone volume had a stronger association for improvement in OHRQoL compared to type of attachment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 20 IFPP (mean age 47.0; SD 12.9 years) and 28 ISOD (mean age 61.5; SD 9.1 years) patients received 2 mandibular implants. Metal ceramic nonsplinted fixed prostheses were provided in IFPP group, while in ISOD group, the mandibular overdentures were retained by nonsplinted attachments. Patients rated their oral health-related quality of life using OHIP-14 Malaysian version at baseline (T0), 2-3 months (T1) and 1 year (T2) postimplant treatment. Mean OHIP-14 for total and domain scores between groups and intervals was analysed using repeated-measures ANOVA and t-test. Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for the comparison of mean score change and effect size, while the association between pre- and post-treatment scores was determined using multivariate linear regression modelling.
RESULTS: The total OHIP and domain scores before implant treatment were significantly higher (lower OHRQoL) in IFPP than in ISOD groups, except for physical pain where this domain showed similar impact in both groups. Postimplant scores between groups at T1 and T2 showed no significant difference. The mean score changes at T0-T1 and T0-T2 for total OHIP-14 and domains were significantly greater in IFPP except in the domains of physical pain and disability which showed no difference. Large effect size (ES) was observed for total OHIP-14 in IFPP while moderate in ISOD. Improved OHRQoL was dependent on the treatment group and pretreatment score.
CONCLUSION: Improvement in OHRQoL occurred following both mandibular implant-supported overdentures and implant fixed partial prostheses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall methods were guided by the Core Outcome Set Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. Initial outcome identification was achieved from focus groups with PWLE employing calibrated methods across two low-middle-income countries (China and Malaysia) and two high-income countries (Spain and the United Kingdom). Following consolidation of the results, the outcomes were incorporated into a three-stage Delphi process with PWLE participation. Finally, consensus between PWLE and DPs was achieved using a mixed live and recorded platform. The experiences of PWLE involvement in the process was also evaluated.
RESULTS: Thirty-one PWLE participated in four focus groups. Thirty-four outcomes were suggested across the focus groups. Evaluation of the focus groups revealed a high level of satisfaction with the engagement process and some new learning. Seventeen PWLE contributed to the first 2 Delphi rounds and 7 to the third round. The final consensus included 17 PWLE (47%) and 19 DPs (53%). Out of the total of 11 final consensus outcomes considered essential by both PWLE and health professionals, 7 (64%) outcomes mapped across to ones that PWLE initially identified, broadening their definition. One outcome (PWLE effort required for treatment and maintenance) was entirely novel.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that engaging PWLE in COS development can be achieved across widely different communities. Furthermore, the process both broadened and enriched overall outcome consensus, yielding important and novel perspectives for health-related research.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Searches were conducted in six databases to identify randomised clinical trials (RCT) comparing staged VRA techniques with a minimum of 3 months follow-up. Relative premature bone resorption (PBR%) overall (primary) and in sites with uneventful versus complicated healing and need for additional bone grafting (NAG) (secondary) were chosen as outcomes. The risk of bias and certainty in evidence were assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 and GRADE tools. Bayesian models estimated treatment effects and rankings.
RESULTS: Ten RCTs, involving 220 participants and 236 defects, were included. Nine RCTs reported mean PBR%, with a range from 6% to 44%, averaging 26%. Seven treatment groups were evaluated: onlay, onlay + barrier, inlay, guided bone regeneration, distraction osteogenesis (DO), tissue expansion + tunnelling (TET), and cortical tenting. Eight RCTs, involving 160 participants and 176 defects, contributed to the NMA. Compared to onlay, all groups had lower mean PBR%. Inlay had the highest probability of being ranked first (Pr = 0.55), followed by DO (Pr = 0.27) and TET (Pr = 0.15). Healing complications significantly increased PBR% (MD 10%, 95% CrI 4.4-15.7).
CONCLUSION: VRA techniques preserving the periosteum (inlay, DO, and TET) exhibit less PBR compared with other techniques. When techniques involve full flap elevation, clinicians should anticipate volume loss at re-entry and consider greater grafting volumes to offset PBR. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42023394396; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=394396.