How far can we go? A 20-year meta-analysis of dental implant survival rates
Johannes Raphael Kupkaa✉, J. Königb, Bilal Al‐Nawasc, Keyvan Saghebc, Eik Schiegnitzc
- aDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Plastic Surgery, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany. johanneskupka@web.de
- bInstitute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany
- cDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Plastic Surgery, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany
- ✉Corresponding author
Papers open inside SciRah from the original publisher or repository; SciRah never hosts them.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to investigate the long-term survival rates of dental implants over a 20-year period, providing a practical guide for clinicians while identifying potential areas for future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were sourced from recent publications, focusing exclusively on screw-shaped titanium implants with a rough surface. Both retrospective and prospective studies were included to ensure an adequate sample size. A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in the databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane, and Web of Science. The risk of bias for all studies was analyzed using a tool by Hoy et al. RESULTS: Three prospective studies (n = 237 implants) revealed a mean implant survival rate of 92% (95% CI: 82% to 97%), decreasing to 78% (95% CI: 74%-82%) after imputation (n = 422 implants). A total of five retrospective studies (n = 1440 implants) showed a survival rate of 88% (95% CI: 78%-94%). Implant failure causes were multifactorial. CONCLUSION: This review consolidates 20-year dental implant survival data, reflecting a remarkable 4 out of 5 implants success rate. It emphasizes the need for long-term follow-up care, addressing multifactorial implant failure. Prioritizing quality standards is crucial to prevent overestimating treatment effectiveness due to potential statistical errors. While dental implantology boasts reliable therapies, there is still room for improvement, and additional high-quality studies are needed, particularly to evaluate implant success. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Never before have the implant survival over 20 years been systematically analyzed in a meta-analysis. Although a long-term survival can be expected, follow-up is essential and shouldn't end after insertion or even after 10 years.
TL;DRThis review consolidates 20-year dental implant survival data, reflecting a remarkable 4 out of 5 implants success rate, and emphasizes the need for long-term follow-up care, addressing multifactorial implant failure. (Semantic Scholar)