Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Are implant-supported removable partial dentures a suitable treatment for partially edentulous patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis


      Statement of problem

      A consensus on the clinical performance of implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) is lacking.


      The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical performance of ISRPDs in terms of the implant survival rates, marginal bone loss, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

      Material and methods

      Four electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were independently searched by 2 reviewers for articles published up to December 2020. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the implant survival rates and marginal bone loss by using the R program. The Cochrane collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-RCT studies.


      Sixteen studies were included, with a total of 334 participants and a mean age of 58 years. The participants received a total of 581 dental implants, 475 conventional and 106 mini-implants. All included studies reported implant survival rate above 90% (range: 92% to 100%). Meta-analysis indicated a high proportion of implant survival rates of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2% to 5%) and a low mean raw score of marginal bone loss 0.98 mm (CI: 0.61 to 1.36 mm). Compared with conventional RPDs, improved patient quality of life and satisfaction were reported by studies that evaluated ISRPDs. RCT studies exhibited a low risk of bias for most domains, while most non-RCT studies were classified as good quality.


      ISRPDs exhibited high implant survival rates and acceptable bone loss with improvement in the quality of life and satisfaction of patients when compared with conventional RPDs. Therefore, they can be considered suitable for the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • de Freitas R.F.
        • de Carvalho Dias K.
        • da Fonte Porto Carreiro A.
        • Barbosa G.A.
        • Ferreira M.A.
        Mandibular implant-supported removable partial denture with distal extension: a systematic review.
        J Oral Rehabil. 2012; 39: 791-798
        • Verri F.R.
        • Pellizzer E.P.
        • Pereira J.A.
        • Zuim P.R.
        • Santiago Júnior J.F.
        Evaluation of bone insertion level of support teeth in class I mandibular removable partial denture associated with an osseointegrated implant: a study using finite element analysis.
        Implant Dent. 2011; 20: 192-201
        • Gonçalves T.M.
        • Campos C.H.
        • Rodrigues Garcia R.C.
        Mastication and jaw motion of partially edentulous patients are affected by different implant-based prostheses.
        J Oral Rehabil. 2014; 41: 507-514
        • De Caxias F.P.
        • Dos Santos D.M.
        • Goiato M.C.
        • Bitencourt S.B.
        • da Silva E.V.F.
        • Laurindo-Junior M.C.B.
        • et al.
        Effects of mouth rehabilitation with removable complete dentures on stimulus perception and the electromyographic activity of the orbicularis oris muscle.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 119: 749-754
        • Gates W.D.
        • Cooper L.F.
        • Sanders A.E.
        • Reside G.J.
        • De Kok I.J.
        The effect of implant-supported removable partial dentures on oral health quality of life.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25: 207-213
        • Grossmann Y.
        • Nissan J.
        • Levin L.
        Clinical effectiveness of implant-supported removable partial dentures: a review of the literature and retrospective case evaluation.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67: 1941-1946
        • Kono K.
        • Kurihara D.
        • Suzuki Y.
        • Ohkubo C.
        Pressure distribution of implant- supported removable partial dentures with stress-breaking attachments.
        J Prosthodont Res. 2014; 58: 115-120
        • Pennington J.
        • Parker S.
        Improving quality of life using removable and fixed implant prostheses.
        Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012; 33: 268-276
        • Keltjens H.M.
        • Kayser A.F.
        • Hertel R.
        • Battistuzzi P.G.
        Distal extension removable partial dentures supported by implants and residual teeth: considerations and case reports.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993; 8: 208-213
        • Thoma D.S.
        • Zeltner M.
        • Hüsler J.
        • Hämmerle C.H.
        • Jung R.E.
        EAO Supplement Working Group 4 - EAO CC 2015 Short implants versus sinus lifting with longer implants to restore the posterior maxilla: a systematic review.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 26: 154-169
        • Fan T.
        • Li Y.
        • Deng W.W.
        • Wu T.
        • Zhang W.
        Short implants (5 to 8 mm) versus longer implants (>8 mm) with sinus lifting in atrophic posterior maxilla: a meta-analysis of RCTs.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017; 19: 207-215
        • Lemos C.A.
        • Ferro-Alves M.L.
        • Okamoto R.
        • Mendonça M.R.
        • Pellizzer E.P.
        Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        J Dent. 2016; 47: 8-17
        • Papaspyridakos P.
        • De Souza A.
        • Vazouras K.
        • Gholami H.
        • Pagni S.
        • Weber H.P.
        Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with implants longer than 6 mm in posterior jaw areas: a meta-analysis.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 8-20
        • Jawad S.
        • Clarke P.T.
        Survival of mini dental implants used to retain mandibular complete overdentures: systematic review.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019; 34: 343-356
        • Lemos C.A.
        • Verri F.R.
        • Batista V.E.
        • Júnior J.F.
        • Mello C.C.
        • Pellizzer E.P.
        Complete overdentures retained by mini implants: a systematic review.
        J Dent. 2017; 57: 4-13
        • de Souza R.F.
        • Ribeiro A.B.
        • Della Vecchia M.P.
        • Costa L.
        • Cunha T.R.
        • Reis A.C.
        • et al.
        Mini vs. standard implants for mandibular overdentures: a randomized trial.
        J Dent Res. 2015; 94: 1376-1384
        • Mitrani R.
        • Brudvik J.S.
        • Phillips K.M.
        Posterior implants for distal extension removable prostheses: a retrospective study.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003; 23: 353-359
        • Gonçalves T.M.
        • Campos C.H.
        • Gonçalves G.M.
        • de Moraes M.
        • Rodrigues Garcia R.C.
        Mastication improvement after partial implant-supported prosthesis use.
        J Dent Res. 2013; 92: 189S-194S
        • Zancopé K.
        • Abrão G.M.
        • Karam F.K.
        • Neves F.D.
        Placement of a distal implant to convert a mandibular removable Kennedy class I to an implant-supported partial removable Class III dental prosthesis: A systematic review.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 113: 528-533
        • Park J.H.
        • Lee J.Y.
        • Shin S.W.
        • Kim H.J.
        Effect of conversion to implant-assisted removable partial denture in patients with mandibular Kennedy classification Ⅰ: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020; 31: 360-373
        • Mijiritsky E.
        • Lorean A.
        • Mazor Z.
        • Levin L.
        Implant tooth-supported removable partial denture with at least 15-year long-term follow-up.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: 917-922
        • Campos C.H.
        • Gonçalves T.M.
        • Garcia R.C.
        Implant-supported removable partial denture improves the quality of life of patients with extreme tooth loss.
        Braz Dent J. 2015; 26: 463-467
        • De Kok I.J.
        • Cooper L.F.
        • Guckes A.D.
        • McGraw K.
        • Wright R.F.
        • Barrero C.J.
        • et al.
        Factors influencing removable partial denture patient-reported outcomes of quality of life and satisfaction: a systematic review.
        J Prosthodont. 2017; 26: 5-18
        • Moher D.
        • Liberati A.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • Altman D.G.
        • PRISMA Group
        Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        PLoS Med. 2009; 6: e1000097
        • Hozo S.P.
        • Djulbegovic B.
        • Hozo I.
        Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005; 5: 13
        • Landis J.R.
        • Koch G.G.
        The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.
        Biometrics. 1977; 33: 159-174
        • Bellia E.
        • Audenino G.
        • Ceruti P.
        • Bassi F.
        Clinical assessment of short implants retaining removable partial dentures: 4-year follow-up.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2020; 35: 207-213
        • Threeburuth W.
        • Aunmeungtong W.
        • Khongkhunthian P.
        Comparison of immediate-load mini dental implants and conventional-size dental implants to retain mandibular Kennedy class I removable partial dentures: a randomized clinical trial.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018; 20: 785-792
        • Disha V.
        • Čelebić A.
        • Rener-Sitar K.
        • Kovačić I.
        • Filipović-Zore I.
        • Peršić S.
        Mini dental implant-retained removable partial dentures: treatment effect size and 6-months follow-up.
        Acta Stomatol Croat. 2018; 52: 184-192
        • Bahrami M.
        • Alsharbaty M.H.M.
        Prospective clinical study of prosthetic treatment outcome of implant-retained-removable-partial-denture during 5 year-follow-ups.
        AMJ. 2017; 10: 927-933
        • Jensen C.
        • Speksnijder C.M.
        • Raghoebar G.M.
        • Kerdijk W.
        • Meijer H.J.A.
        • Cune M.S.
        Implant-supported mandibular removable partial dentures: functional, clinical and radiographical parameters in relation to implant position.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017; 19: 432-439
        • Jensen C.
        • Speksnijder C.M.
        • Raghoebar G.M.
        • Kerdijk W.
        • Meijer H.J.A.
        • Cune M.S.
        Implant-supported mandibular removable partial dentures; patient-based outcome measures in relation to implant position.
        J Dent. 2016; 55: 92-98
        • Payne A.G.
        • Tawse-Smith A.
        • Wismeijer D.
        • De Silva R.K.
        • Ma S.
        Multicentre prospective evaluation of implant-assisted mandibular removable partial dentures: surgical and prosthodontic outcomes.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28: 116-125
        • Wismeijer D.
        • Tawse-Smith A.
        • Payne A.G.
        Multicentre prospective evaluation of implant-assisted mandibular bilateral distal extension removable partial dentures: patient satisfaction.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 20-27
        • Mahrous A.I.
        • Aldawash H.A.
        • Soliman T.A.
        • Banasr F.H.
        • Abdelwahed A.
        Implant supported distal extension overdenture retained by two types of attachments. A Comparative radiographic study by cone beam computed tomography.
        J Int Oral Health. 2015; 7: 5-10
        • Gonçalves T.M.
        • Campos C.H.
        • Gonçalves G.M.
        • de Moraes M.
        • Rodrigues Garcia R.C.
        Effects of implant-based prostheses on mastication, nutritional intake, and oral health–related quality of life in partially edentulous patients: a paired clinical trial.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015; 30: 391-396
        • Gonçalves T.M.
        • Campos C.H.
        • Garcia R.C.
        Implant retention and support for distal extension partial removable dental prostheses: satisfaction outcomes.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112: 334-339
        • El Mekawy N.H.
        • El-Negoly S.A.
        • Grawish Mel -A.
        • El-Hawary Y.M.
        Intracoronal mandibular Kennedy Class I implant-tooth supported removable partial overdenture: a 2-year multicenter prospective study.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27: 677-683
        • Mohamed G.F.
        • El Sawy A.A.
        The role of single immediate loading implant in long Class IV Kennedy mandibular partial denture.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012; 14: 708-715
        • Albrektsson T.
        • Zarb G.
        • Worthington P.
        • Eriksson A.R.
        The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986; 1: 11-25