Skip to main content

Table 6 MBL outcomes (FISR versus RISR) in the included studies

From: Marginal bone loss around oral implants supporting fixed versus removable prostheses: a systematic review

Authors (year)Year 1 (FISP/RISP)Year 2 (FISP/RISP)Year 3 (FISP/RISP)Year 4 (FISP/RISP)Year 5 (FISP/RISP)Year 6
(FISP/RISP)
…Year 10 (FISP/RISP)Conclusion
Palmqvist et al. 1996a 1.25 ± 0.43
1
1.5 ± 0.5
3.75 ± 1.3
1.63 ± 0.42
3 ± 0.17
1.4 ± 0.66
1.5 ± 0.67
1.58 ± 0.76
1.04 ± 0.2
 No significant difference in MBL between FISR and RISR after 4 years
Cune et al. 1996b2.1 ± 1.6 2.5 ± 2.7      NRc
Makkonen et al. 1997b0.17 ± 0.07
0.31 ± 0.34
0.19 ± 0.17
0.45 ± 0.4
0.25 ± 0.16
0.53 ± 0.38
0.3 ± 0.18
0.53 ± 0.42
0.36 ± 0.22
0.56 ± 0.45
  No statistically significant difference in MBL between FISP and RISP after 4 years. MBL statistically significantly higher (p < 0.04) in RISP compared with FISP after 3 years.
Tinsley et al. 2001b1
0.5
1.1
0.6
1.2
0.8
1.4
1
1.5
1.4
  Initially more MBL in FISP. After that slightly more rapid MBL in RISP group. At the end of the 5th year MBL in both groups remarkably similar.
Raghoebar et al. 2003b0.36 ± 0.60.22 ± 0.550.47 ± 0.62
0.39 ± 0.48
    No significant difference in MBL between RISP and FISP after 3 years (p > 0.3)
Quirynen et al. 2004b      0.73
0.86
MBL between FISP and RISP not significantly different after 10 years.
  1. aAuthor used a scoring system, thus conversion to mm was not possible. Weighted arithmetic means were calculated for each of the given years
  2. bValues are mean cumulative bone loss (mm) described as a distance from a fixed baseline reference point
  3. cNR: not reported; author did not comment on the MBL outcome FISP vs RISP