Table 2 Summary of included studies; study type, demographic data from included patients and inclusion criteria
From: Clinical performance of additively manufactured subperiosteal implants: a systematic review
Authors | Year | Type of study | n (patients) | Mean age. (years) | Sex | n (implants) | Cause of bone defect | Inclusion criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mangano et al. [40] | 2020 | Case series | 10 | 69.6 range: 68 to 75 | 6F/4 M | 10 | Bone atrophy | Healthy patients Age > 65 years Nonsmoker Partially edentulous (≥ 2 teeth) Residual bone < 10 mm Acceptable oral hygiene Regenerative bone surgery unwillingness |
Van den Borre et al. [36] | 2022 | Prospective Multicenter Study | 15 | Male: 57.4; SD ± 8.7 Female: 62.2; SD ± 3.4 | 7F/8 M | 15 | Bone atrophy | Cawood–Howell atrophy ≥ 5 Consecutive patients Bilateral placement in the maxilla |
Van den Borre et al. [39] | 2023 | Retrospective Multicenter Study | 40 | Male: 64.6; SD ± 6.7 Female: 65.2; SD ± 6.8 | 25F/15 M | 40 | Maxillary defect reconstructions were excluded | Placement at least one year before assessment 122 patients eligible; definitive inclusion by patient and surgeon decisions Maxillary severe atrophy (Cawood–Howell atrophy ≥ 5) |
Chamorro Pons et al. [41] | 2021 | Case series | 8 | 72.2 | 6F/2 M | 8 | Bone atrophy | Cawood–Howell atrophy ≥ 5 No systemic contraindications |
Cebrián et al. [29] | 2022 | Case series | 4 | 66.2 | 3F/1 M | 4 | Segmental maxillary oncological defect (due to OSCC) | Patients with segmental maxillary oncological defect that had been reconstructed with a subperiosteal implant |
Nemtoi et al. [42] | 2022 | Retrospective Cohort Multicenter Study | 16 | 61.5 Range: 55 to 69 | 7F/9 M | 16 | Bone atrophy | Patient over the age of 55 years Treated with DMLS manufactured subperiosteal implant Equilibrated general and oral health Improved oral hygiene Nonsmoker Available bone height ≤ 10 mm Regenerative bone surgery unwillingness |
Cerea et al. [43] | 2018 | Retrospective Multicenter Study | 70 | 62.8 Range: 62 to 79 | 31F/39 M | 70 | Bone atrophy | Patient over the age of 60 years Treated with DMLS manufactured subperiosteal implant 2-year minimum follow-up Nonsmoker and not bruxist |
Dimitroulis et al. [44] | 2023 | Case series Multicenter Study | 21 | 59.1 Range: 31 to 80 | 14F/7 M | 21 | Bone atrophy. Maxillectomy (1/21) | Cawood–Howell atrophy ≥ 5 Partial or fully edentulous arches Nonsmoker Not suffering from a terminal ill or severe medical conditions (as radiotherapy of the jaws) |
Mounir et al. [45] | 2018 | Observational clinical study | 5* | 27.4 Range: 18 to 55 | 1F/4 M | 5 | Bone atrophy | Anterior maxillary bone defect Not enough bone volume to room standard root-form implants (with at least 3 mm of diameter and 8 mm height) No systemic disease or oral pathosis that may affect bone healing No previous grafting procedure at the implant site |
Gellrich et al. [46] | 2017 | Case series | 3 | 68 Range: 55 to 90 | 2F/1 M | 4 | Bone atrophy (2/3 due to OSCC) | History of severe bone loss Patients requesting implant-supported dental prosthesis in the absence or impossibility of bone reconstruction by conventional techniques No history of bisphosphonate therapy, psychiatric disorder, alcohol-related diseases, or active smoking |
Korn et al. [47] | 2022 | Case series | 10 | 66 Range: 50 to 90 | 7F/3 M | 13 (3 bilateral) | Bone atrophy | Cawood–Howell atrophy ≥ 5 No head-neck cancer history or previous irradiation No cleft lip or palate, or trauma history |
Rahlf et al. [48] | 2022 | Case series | 6 | 51 Range: 18 to 68 | 3F/3 M | 6 | Cleft lip and palate deformity (CLP) | CLP-associated deformity Maxillary partial or total edentulism |
Korn et al. [49] | 2021 | Case series Single-center Study | 19 | 65 Range: 30 to 85 | 9F/10 M | 20 (1 bilateral) | Bone atrophy. 15/20 due to oral malignancy treatment 5/20 due to aggressive oral lesion treatment | Previous tumor resection No history of failed augmentation procedure, trauma, or cleft palate |