Bruxism and Dental Implants: A Meta-Analysis
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 6, 2026
Oral Biofilm Formation on Different Materials for Dental Implants
Published on: June 24, 2018
Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic1, Tomas Albrektsson, Ann Wennerberg
1*PhD Student, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden. †Retired Professor and Former Head, Department of Biomaterials, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden; Guest Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden. ‡Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Purpose:
To test the null hypothesis of no difference in the implant failure rates, postoperative infection, and marginal bone loss after the insertion of dental implants in bruxers compared with the insertion in non-bruxers against the alternative hypothesis of a difference.
Methods:
An electronic search was undertaken in June 2014. Eligibility criteria included clinical studies, either randomized or not.
Results:
Ten publications were included with a total of 760 implants inserted in bruxers (49 failures; 6.45%) and 2989 in non-bruxers (109 failures; 3.65%). Due to lack of information, meta-analyses for the outcomes "postoperative infection" and "marginal bone loss" were not possible. A risk ratio of 2.93 was found (95% confidence interval, 1.48-5.81; P = 0.002).
Conclusions:
These results cannot suggest that the insertion of dental implants in bruxers affects the implant failure rates due to a limited number of published studies, all characterized by a low level of specificity, and most of them deal with a limited number of cases without a control group. Therefore, the real effect of bruxing habits on the osseointegration and survival of endosteal dental implants is still not well established.
