Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Teeth01:15

Teeth

2.2K
The formation of teeth, also known as odontogenesis, is a complex process that begins in utero, around the sixth week of embryonic development. There are three stages to this process: the bud stage, the cap stage, and the bell stage.
In the bud stage, the tooth germ (an aggregation of cells) starts to form in the developing jawbone. During the cap stage, the tooth germ differentiates into enamel organ, dental papilla, and dental sac, which will later develop into the tooth's enamel, dentin...
2.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in people receiving cancer treatment: photobiomodulation.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Topical silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for preventing and managing dental caries in children and adults.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Water fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy for treating periodontal and peri-implant diseases.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Topical fluoride as a cause of dental fluorosis in children.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children.

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 26, 2026

3D Planning and Printing of Patient Specific Implants for Reconstruction of Bony Defects
08:15

3D Planning and Printing of Patient Specific Implants for Reconstruction of Bony Defects

Published on: August 4, 2020

6.0K

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants.

Marco Esposito1, Yasmin Ardebili, Helen V Worthington

  • 1Cochrane Oral Health Group, School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, Coupland 3 Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL.

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
|July 23, 2014
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

No specific dental implant type guarantees superior long-term success. However, smoother (turned) implant surfaces may reduce the risk of peri-implantitis (chronic infection) compared to rougher surfaces.

More Related Videos

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
05:54

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla

Published on: October 18, 2021

2.1K
Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures
09:10

Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures

Published on: August 5, 2021

2.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 26, 2026

3D Planning and Printing of Patient Specific Implants for Reconstruction of Bony Defects
08:15

3D Planning and Printing of Patient Specific Implants for Reconstruction of Bony Defects

Published on: August 4, 2020

6.0K
Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
05:54

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla

Published on: October 18, 2021

2.1K
Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures
09:10

Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures

Published on: August 5, 2021

2.0K

Area of Science:

  • Biomaterials Science
  • Dental Implantology
  • Clinical Dentistry

Background:

  • Dental implants vary in material, shape, and surface characteristics, with numerous designs developed to enhance clinical outcomes.
  • This review is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2002, with subsequent updates in 2003, 2005, and 2007.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the clinical effects of different root-formed osseointegrated dental implant types for tooth replacement.
  • Specific comparisons include implants with different surface preparations, shapes, materials, or combinations thereof.
  • To compare turned versus roughened dental implants regarding early failure and peri-implantitis incidence.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified through extensive database searches (Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE) up to January 2014.
  • Included RCTs comparing osseointegrated dental implants with at least one year of functional follow-up.
  • Analyzed outcomes including implant success, marginal bone level changes, and peri-implantitis incidence using fixed-effect or random-effects models.

Main Results:

  • Included 27 RCTs with 1512 participants and 3230 implants, comparing 38 different implant types.
  • No significant differences were found between various implant types for overall implant failures.
  • Implants with turned (smoother) surfaces showed a statistically significant 20% reduction in peri-implantitis risk compared to rough surfaces at three years post-loading.

Conclusions:

  • Current evidence does not support any specific dental implant type as having superior long-term success.
  • Limited evidence suggests smoother (turned) implant surfaces may be less prone to peri-implantitis than rougher surfaces.
  • Findings are based on RCTs, many with high risk of bias, limited participants, and relatively short follow-up periods.