Table 6.
MBL outcomes (FISR versus RISR) in the included studies
| Authors (year) | Year 1 (FISP/RISP) | Year 2 (FISP/RISP) | Year 3 (FISP/RISP) | Year 4 (FISP/RISP) | Year 5 (FISP/RISP) | Year 6 (FISP/RISP) |
…Year 10 (FISP/RISP) | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palmqvist et al. 1996a |
1.25 ± 0.43 1 |
1.5 ± 0.5 3.75 ± 1.3 |
1.63 ± 0.42 3 ± 0.17 |
1.4 ± 0.66 1.5 ± 0.67 |
1.58 ± 0.76 1.04 ± 0.2 |
No significant difference in MBL between FISR and RISR after 4 years | ||
| Cune et al. 1996b | 2.1 ± 1.6 2.5 ± 2.7 | NRc | ||||||
| Makkonen et al. 1997b |
0.17 ± 0.07 0.31 ± 0.34 |
0.19 ± 0.17 0.45 ± 0.4 |
0.25 ± 0.16 0.53 ± 0.38 |
0.3 ± 0.18 0.53 ± 0.42 |
0.36 ± 0.22 0.56 ± 0.45 |
No statistically significant difference in MBL between FISP and RISP after 4 years. MBL statistically significantly higher (p < 0.04) in RISP compared with FISP after 3 years. | ||
| Tinsley et al. 2001b |
1 0.5 |
1.1 0.6 |
1.2 0.8 |
1.4 1 |
1.5 1.4 |
Initially more MBL in FISP. After that slightly more rapid MBL in RISP group. At the end of the 5th year MBL in both groups remarkably similar. | ||
| Raghoebar et al. 2003b | 0.36 ± 0.60.22 ± 0.55 |
0.47 ± 0.62 0.39 ± 0.48 |
No significant difference in MBL between RISP and FISP after 3 years (p > 0.3) | |||||
| Quirynen et al. 2004b |
0.73 0.86 |
MBL between FISP and RISP not significantly different after 10 years. | ||||||
aAuthor used a scoring system, thus conversion to mm was not possible. Weighted arithmetic means were calculated for each of the given years
bValues are mean cumulative bone loss (mm) described as a distance from a fixed baseline reference point
cNR: not reported; author did not comment on the MBL outcome FISP vs RISP