Data sources Data was collected utilising Medline (OVID interface), Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. Systematic reviews with/without meta-analysis were selected which included patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life as outcome measures. The literature search performed included systematic reviews with publication dates ranging from 1946 to 2018. PROSPERO was also used to incorporate systematic reviews that had been completed after the last search in August 2018.

Study selection Studies were selected using the PICO model, selecting systematic reviews analysing adult edentulous patients with conventional complete dentures and/or implant-retained overdentures. The systematic reviews chosen assessed satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life, while comparing results to adult edentulous patients with no replacement teeth or prosthesis.

Data extraction and synthesis All of the articles located from the database searches were uploaded to reference management software. Articles were screened independently by two authors to reduce bias and to assess the articles against the predetermined inclusion criteria. The EndNote filter Service was applied to avoid duplication of articles. Guidance from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York) was incorporated to present data narratively, with text and tables. Eight reviews were included in data synthesis.

Results Of the eight reviews included, six were systematic reviews without meta-analysis, one systematic review with meta-analysis was included and one was meta-analysis.

Conclusions The results of this systematic review highlight the greater benefits of implant retained overdentures compared with conventional complete dentures when assessing patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life. The superiority of implant retained overdentures is most evident when patients cannot tolerate conventional complete dentures. However, consideration most be given to the adaptive capabilities of patients and the financial implications of implant-retained overdentures.

数据源数据是使用Medline（OVID接口），Google Scholar和Cochrane库收集的。选择进行/不进行荟萃分析的系统评价，其中包括患者满意度和与口腔健康相关的生活质量作为结果指标。进行的文献检索包括系统评价，发布日期为1946年至2018年.PROSPERO还用于纳入系统评价，该系统评价在2018年8月的最后一次搜索后完成。

研究选择使用PICO模型选择研究，选择系统评价来分析具有常规全口义齿和/或植入物固位覆盖义齿的成年无牙颌患者。选择的系统评价评估了满意度和与口腔健康相关的生活质量，同时将结果与没有牙齿或假体的成人无牙病患者进行了比较。

数据提取和综合来自数据库搜索的所有文章均已上载到参考管理软件。文章由两名作者独立筛选，以减少偏见并根据预定的纳入标准评估文章。EndNote筛选器服务被应用以避免文章重复。纳入了评论与传播中心（约克大学）的指南，以文本和表格的形式叙述数据。八项评论被纳入数据综合。

结果纳入的8篇评论中，有6篇是不进行荟萃分析的系统评价，其中一项是采用荟萃分析的系统评价，另一篇为荟萃分析。

结论该系统评价的结果突出了在评估患者满意度和与口腔健康相关的生活质量时，与传统的全口义齿相比，保留义齿的植入物具有更大的优势。当患者无法忍受常规的全口义齿时，植入物保留义齿的优势最为明显。但是，最要考虑的是患者的适应能力以及植入物保留的覆盖义齿的财务影响。