Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2023
Efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation with xenografts and resorbable socket sealing materials in the esthetic region: A systematic review with meta-analyses.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Apaza-Bedoya Karin, Magrin Gabriel Leonardo, Romandini Mario, Blanco-Carrión Juan, Benfatti Cesar Augusto Magalhães
Аннотация
AIM: The present systematic review aimed to identify and summarize the clinical, radiographic, and histological outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation using bone xenografts and absorbable sealing materials compared with spontaneous healing in the esthetic zone.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) fulfilling specific eligibility criteria were included. Two review authors independently searched for eligible studies, extracted data from the published reports and performed the risk of bias assessment (RoB 2 tool). Study results were summarized using random effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Thirteen articles concerning 10 RCTs were included, involving a total of 357 participants. Most of studies were considered as "low" risk of bias. Meta-analyses indicated less horizontal (difference in means-MD = 1.88 mm; p < 0.001), vertical mid-buccal (MD = 1.84 mm; p < 0.001) and vertical mid-lingual (MD = 2.27 mm; p < 0.001) bone resorption in alveolar ridge preservation compared to spontaneous healing as assessed clinically. Bone changes assessed radiographically showed consistent results in terms of horizontal (at 1 mm: MD = 1.84 mm, p < 0.001), vertical mid-buccal (MD = 0.95 mm; p < 0.001) and mid-lingual (MD = 0.62 mm; p = 0.05) resorption. Part of the bone resorption in the spontaneous healing group was compensated by soft-tissues, since the observed differences between groups in linear ridge reduction evaluated through cast models superimposition were smaller (MD = 0.52 mm; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar ridge preservation with xenogeneic bone substitutes and non-autogenous resorbable socket sealing materials is efficacious in reducing post-extraction bone and ridge changes in the esthetic region.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) fulfilling specific eligibility criteria were included. Two review authors independently searched for eligible studies, extracted data from the published reports and performed the risk of bias assessment (RoB 2 tool). Study results were summarized using random effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Thirteen articles concerning 10 RCTs were included, involving a total of 357 participants. Most of studies were considered as "low" risk of bias. Meta-analyses indicated less horizontal (difference in means-MD = 1.88 mm; p < 0.001), vertical mid-buccal (MD = 1.84 mm; p < 0.001) and vertical mid-lingual (MD = 2.27 mm; p < 0.001) bone resorption in alveolar ridge preservation compared to spontaneous healing as assessed clinically. Bone changes assessed radiographically showed consistent results in terms of horizontal (at 1 mm: MD = 1.84 mm, p < 0.001), vertical mid-buccal (MD = 0.95 mm; p < 0.001) and mid-lingual (MD = 0.62 mm; p = 0.05) resorption. Part of the bone resorption in the spontaneous healing group was compensated by soft-tissues, since the observed differences between groups in linear ridge reduction evaluated through cast models superimposition were smaller (MD = 0.52 mm; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar ridge preservation with xenogeneic bone substitutes and non-autogenous resorbable socket sealing materials is efficacious in reducing post-extraction bone and ridge changes in the esthetic region.