Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Patient satisfaction and survival of maxillary overdentures supported by four or six splinted implants: a systematic review with meta-analysis

  • Fabrizio Di Francesco(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Gennaro De Marco
    ,
  • Estefani B. Capcha
    ,
  • Alessandro Lanza
    ,
  • Corina M. Cristache
    ,
  • Rolando Vernal
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Campania University Luigi Vanvitelli
    ,
  • Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia
    ,
  • Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy
    ,
  • Universidad de Chile
    ,
  • ,
  • Universidad Científica del Sur
Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Open access

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Article number

247

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

BMC Oral Health (Volume 21, Issue 1)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 12/2021

Publication status

Published - 12/2021

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85105605371
  • PubMed: 33962612

Abstract

Background: Implant-supported overdentures offer enhanced mechanical properties, which lead to better patient satisfaction and survival rates than conventional dentures. However, it is unclear whether these satisfaction levels and survival rates depend on the number of implants supporting the overdenture. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to compare maxillary overdentures supported by four or six splinted implants in terms of patient satisfaction, implant survival, overdenture survival, and prosthodontic complications. Methods: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), and EMBASE databases were systematically searched and complemented by hand searching from 2000 to 2019, employing a combination of specific keywords. Studies comparing the use of four versus six implants for supporting overdentures with at least one-year of follow-up after prosthesis installation and including ten fully edentulous patients were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was analyzed with Cochrane’s RoB 2 and Newcastle–Ottawa tools. Implants and prosthesis survival rates were analyzed by random-effects meta-analysis and expressed as risk ratios or risk differences, respectively, and by the non-parametric unpaired Fisher’s test. Results: A total of 15 from 1865 articles were included, and reported follow-up times after implant placement ranged from 1 to 10 years. Irrespective of the number of implants used, high scores were reported by all studies investigating patient satisfaction. Meta-analysis and non-parametric Fisher’s test showed no statistical differences regarding the survival rate of implants (P = 0.34, P = 0.3) or overdentures (P = 0.74, P = 0.9) when using 4 versus 6 splinted implants to support overdentures, and no significant differences regarding prosthodontic complications were found between groups. Randomized studies presented high RoB and non-randomized studies presented acceptable quality. Conclusions: Within the limits of this systematic review, we can conclude that the bar-supported overdenture on four implants is not inferior to the overdenture supported by six implants for rehabilitating the edentulous maxilla, in terms of patient satisfaction, survival rates of implants and overdentures, and prosthodontic complications.

Funding Details

This investigation has been financially supported by the grant FONDECYT 1181780 from the Chilean Governmental Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID). EAC was a recipient of the Ph.D. scholarship from the School of Graduates of the Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Chile.
FundersFunding numbers
ANID
-
Chilean Governmental Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo
-
FONDECYT
1181780