Dental implants inserted in male versus female patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to test the null hypothesis of no difference in the failure rates, marginal bone loss (MBL) and post-operative infection for implants inserted in male or female patients, against the alternative hypothesis of a difference. An electronic search without time or language restrictions was undertaken in December 2014. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, either randomized or not. Ninety-one publications were included, with a total of 27,203 implants inserted in men (1185 failures), and 25,154 implants inserted in women (1039 failures). The results suggest that the insertion of dental implants in male patients statistically affected the implant failure rates (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.07-1.37, P = 0.002). Due to the limited number of studies reporting results on MBL, it is difficult to estimate the real effect of the insertion of implants in different sexes on the marginal bone level. Due to lack of satisfactory information, meta-analysis for the outcome 'post-operative infection' was not performed. The results have to be interpreted with caution due to the presence of several confounding factors in the included studies.

The All‐on‐4 concept for full‐arch rehabilitation of the edentulous maxillae: A longitudinal study with 5‐13 years of follow‐up

“…Moreover, the result is also supported by previous publications: A meta-analytic investigation31 of 91 studies with 52 357 implants registered a 21% increase on the implant failure rate for male patients while assessing the outcome of dental implantsupported restorations. Moreover, the result is also supported by previous publications: A meta-analytic investigation31 of 91 studies with 52 357 implants registered a 21% increase on the implant failure rate for male patients while assessing the outcome of dental implantsupported restorations.…”

Factors influencing marginal bone loss at a hydrophilic implant design placed with or without GBR procedures: A 5‐year retrospective study

“…No conclusion could be made regarding marginal bone loss due to the lack of studies. 44 In conclusion, the statistical analyses revealed that some factors related to the implant, patient, and clinical procedures affected the marginal bone remodeling at the hydrophilic and moderately rough implants in the present study. Since a relatively low number of implants were placed in the study, it is likely that the different factors interplayed and affected the statistical outcome, which has to be interpreted with caution.…”

“…In a meta‐analysis study on the effect on gender in implant patients, Chrcanovic et al found more implant failures in male than in female. No conclusion could be made regarding marginal bone loss due to the lack of studies …”

Identification of oral bacteria on titanium implant surfaces by 16S rDNA sequencing

“…In addition, studies on the literature reported implant failure rates ranging from 4 up to 34% (Chrcanovic et al. ). Briefly, after the implant insertion, water molecules and fluids containing protein from saliva, gingival crevicular fluid and serum bind to the implant surface incorporating ions and forming a pellicle rich in protein, which serves as basis for the development of the oral biofilm (Dorkhan et al.…”

“…Recent studies showed that peri-implantitis occurs in 20% of the implants with an average time in function varying between 5 and 11 years (Mombelli et al 2012) and is closely related to bacterial biofilm formation on the implant surface (Teughels et al 2006). In addition, studies on the literature reported implant failure rates ranging from 4 up to 34% (Chrcanovic et al 2015). Briefly, after the implant insertion, water molecules and fluids containing protein from saliva, gingival crevicular fluid and serum bind to the implant surface incorporating ions and forming a pellicle rich in protein, which serves as basis for the development of the oral biofilm (Dorkhan et al 2012).…”