Background/Objectives: Recent research has indicated that placing dental implants in patients diagnosed with bruxism has led to higher rates of implant failure. This study aimed to provide more accurate knowledge about the relationship between bruxism and implant loss in patients (number, age, gender) with different numbers of implants and prosthetic restorations, considering the follow-up time, compared to non-bruxers. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Cochrane Library using the keyword combination “dental implant”, “bruxism”, and “implant failure”. This search had no language or time restrictions. Results: The review included 15 papers, which were divided into four groups. The first group focused on studies regarding implant loss regardless of the superstructure. In the second group, research on implant-supported removable prostheses was examined. The third group consisted of a single study specifically addressing implant-supported single crowns. Lastly, the fourth group comprised two studies investigating implant-supported single crowns and fixed partial dentures. Only three out of the fifteen studies failed to find a correlation between bruxism and implant failure. The meta-analysis shows a significant pooled effect across the included studies, with an odds ratio of 4.68. Conclusions: Bruxism is a probable risk factor for mechanical issues in implant-supported prostheses and implant-supported crowns. Additionally, elevated failure rates have been documented in patients with bruxism.

Background: This systematic review assesses the current literature (2020–2024) evaluating the impact of smoking on dental implant failure rates. Methods: A non-funded Pubmed database review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, and the results were tabulated to extract the study design, patient characteristics, follow-up time, comparison, outcome, and strengths and weaknesses, including risk of bias. This review included 33 studies with 29,519 implants placed in over 18,301 patients. We included prospective and retrospective clinical studies, randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and observational studies that examined smoking’s effects on implant failure rates. Studies had to classify individuals into two groups, smokers and non-smokers, with at least ten implants. Exclusions included reviews, case reports, experimental studies, guidelines, non-English publications, studies lacking comparative data on failure rates, those excluding smokers, and studies focusing on head and neck cancer patients or specialized implants. Results: Our findings indicate a significant correlation in 25 out of 33 studies between smoking and increased implant failure rates, affecting both early and late stages of implant integration and survival as well as revealing a dose–response relationship, with higher daily cigarette consumption significantly increasing the risk of implant failure. Conclusions: This review highlights the importance of smoking cessation efforts, patient education, and tailored patient care in dental implantology. Future research should explore the effects of smoking frequency and alternative tobacco products, such as e-cigarettes, aiming to improve success rates among smokers.