Evidence Hub

Dental implants in growing patients: a systematic review

Lauren Bohner, Marcel Hanisch, J. Kleinheinz, Susanne Jung

British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2019

147 participants · 95 citations

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review (for which we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines) was to provide an overview of the protocols and clinical outcomes of dental implants placed in growing jaws. We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Science Direct databases in October and November, 2017. A total of 3492 studies were identified, and all the studies reporting the outcomes of dental implants placed during the growth phase were included in the study. After duplicates had been removed, 2133 studies were screened based on their titles and abstracts, and 162 were selected for reading. Finally, 28 studies were included in the review. Overall, 493 dental implants were placed in 147 patients aged from 3-18 years old with follow-up being from 1-20 years. The most common disorders seen that were associated with missing teeth were ectodermal dysplasia and dental trauma. The main complications reported were the infraocclusion positioning of dental implants in the maxillary arch and the rotation of dental implants in the mandibular arch. Dental implants were indicated for the anterior regions of the maxilla and mandible in patients over 10 years old, and placement of maxillary implants in a more coronal position was recommended. Consultations and adjustments to prostheses were required until growth had ceased. In growing jaws, dental implants require positional modifications, and they should be considered only under…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 147 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free