Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42446785›Full record

ReviewMaxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery2026

Failure rate and treatment plan options of dental implants in patients with fibro-osseous lesions: a systematic review.

Fazele Atarbashi-Moghadam, Amirali Farahani Afsaryeh, Saede Atarbashi-Moghadam, Amir-Ali Yousefi-Koma, Ali Azadi, Mahdi Kadkhodazadeh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Fazele Atarbashi-MoghadamShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Amirali Farahani AfsaryehShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Saede Atarbashi-MoghadamShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran. dr.atarbashi@gmail.com.
Amir-Ali Yousefi-KomaShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Ali AzadiShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran. azadiali1377@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8775-8732
Mahdi KadkhodazadehShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDental implant placement requires prerequisites, such as the quality and quantity of the available bone. Oral and maxillofacial fibro-osseous lesions (FOLs) are a group of intraosseous benign lesions, consisting of cemento-osseous dysplasia (COD), fibrous dysplasia (FD), and cemento-ossifying fibroma (COF), characterized by progressive replacement of normal bone tissue by fibrous connective tissue comprising varying amounts of mineralized substances, and consequently, the quality of the bone tissue. The aim of this study is to provide information for clinicians on the risks of implant insertion into these types of lesions. MAIN TEXT: The ISI Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched based on the following PICO: The PICO question of the present study is as follows: What are the failure rates and treatment plan options (O) of implant placement (I) in patients with a fibro-osseous lesion who need an implant treatment at the site of the lesion (P)? Of the 301 identified studies, 39 eligible studies (16 on COD, 14 on FD, and nine on COF) were included in the present systematic review. Overall, 40 and 56 implants were placed in healthy areas near the lesions, in the grafted tissues placed in the location of the removed lesions, or within the COD and FD lesions, respectively. All of the 29 implants in the group of COF lesions were placed in the healed or grafted tissue, replacing the resected COF-affected areas. The failure rate of implants placed in the studies investigating COD, FD, and COF lesions were 22.50%, 7.14%, and 10.34%, respectively. Treatment options for implant placement in COD and FD lesions were reported as removing the lesion and waiting for the bone to be healed (with or without grafting), placing implant in the healthy bone near the lesion, or placing the implant embedded in the lesion. However, all of COF lesions were removed (mostly with resection) and dental implants were placed in the grafted tissue.

conclusionConsidering the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that it would be more appropriate to avoid placing dental implants into the COD and FD lesions and inserting the implants in the surrounding healthy bone, healed, or grafted bone tissues are preferred. However, due to the neoplastic nature of COF removing the lesions prior to the implant insertion is crucial.

Indexed as

Cemento-osseous DysplasiaCemento Ossifying FibromaDental ImplantsFibrous Dysplasia of Bone

Identifiers

PMID42446785
PMCPMC13379526

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.