BMC oral health · 2024
Repairing alveolar bone defect using demineralized dentin grafts: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ling Yali, Chen Danjun, Li Panchun, Zeng Xinyi, Xu Wanghan
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The alveolar bone defect often was hardly healed naturally by the body's repair mechanism. Implant placement was the most favored option for replacing a missing tooth in the current times, and the preservation of alveolar bone was vital. Tooth components, especially dentin, were very similar to alveolar bone components and could be used for promoting the alveolar bone regeneration process in reconstructive dentistry.
METHODS: We exhaustively scoured multiple literature databases, such as PubMed and Embase, from inception to September 2024. The protocol for this meta-analysis was officially registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023400591). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported alveolar bone preservation through demineralized dentin grafts were chosen from the studies. We extracted both qualitative and quantitative data and evaluated statistical heterogeneity using the I2 test. The potential for publication bias was evaluated using both qualitative and quantitative methods. A visual evaluation of the funnel plot was used for the qualitative assessment, with the Begg's test and the Egger's test were used for quantitative analysis.
RESULTS: Ultimately, 7 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 230 participants who were adults without systemic diseases and free from caries or peri-apical infections. Compared with the control group, the demineralized dentin matrix (DDM) group was not statistically significant for improving radiographic ridge width change (SMD - 0.09, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.22) and ISQ values (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -2.39 to 2.51). These results indicate that DDM performs comparably to the control, suggesting that it can be considered an effective alternative in achieving similar outcomes in these specific measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The DDM grafts appear to be a feasible alternative to other biomaterials used for alveolar bone preservation.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable. This study is a meta-analysis and does not involve a clinical trial. Therefore, no clinical trial number has been assigned.
METHODS: We exhaustively scoured multiple literature databases, such as PubMed and Embase, from inception to September 2024. The protocol for this meta-analysis was officially registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023400591). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported alveolar bone preservation through demineralized dentin grafts were chosen from the studies. We extracted both qualitative and quantitative data and evaluated statistical heterogeneity using the I2 test. The potential for publication bias was evaluated using both qualitative and quantitative methods. A visual evaluation of the funnel plot was used for the qualitative assessment, with the Begg's test and the Egger's test were used for quantitative analysis.
RESULTS: Ultimately, 7 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 230 participants who were adults without systemic diseases and free from caries or peri-apical infections. Compared with the control group, the demineralized dentin matrix (DDM) group was not statistically significant for improving radiographic ridge width change (SMD - 0.09, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.22) and ISQ values (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -2.39 to 2.51). These results indicate that DDM performs comparably to the control, suggesting that it can be considered an effective alternative in achieving similar outcomes in these specific measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The DDM grafts appear to be a feasible alternative to other biomaterials used for alveolar bone preservation.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable. This study is a meta-analysis and does not involve a clinical trial. Therefore, no clinical trial number has been assigned.