牙科
牙槽嵴
牙槽嵴
医学
富血小板纤维蛋白
牙槽
吸收
科克伦图书馆
萃取(化学)
荟萃分析
口腔正畸科
随机对照试验
纤维蛋白
外科
内科学
化学
免疫学
色谱法
植入
作者
João Vitor dos Santos Canellas,Brunna Soares,Fabio Ritto,Mário Vianna Vettore,Guaracilei Maciel Vidigal,Ricardo Guimarães Fischer,Paulo José Medeiros
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.jcms.2021.06.005
摘要
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to compare different bone-substitute materials used for alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction. The electronic search was carried out on Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and grey literature up to March 22, 2020 (registration number INPLASY202030005). Only randomized controlled trials were included to answer the following PICOS question: ‘What grafting materials produce greater alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction?’ The primary outcomes were the alveolar width resorption 1 mm below the alveolar crest and buccal height resorption in millimeters. Of the 4379 studies initially identified, 31 studies involving 1088 patients were included in the quantitative analyses. Out of 25 revised biomaterials, eight showed a statistically significant difference compared with unassisted healing in both alveolar width and height measurements (mean width differences: ApatosⓇ, 2.27 [1.266–3.28]; Bio-OssⓇ, 0.88 [0.33–1.42]; Bio-Oss CollⓇ, 0.53 [0.04–1.01]; Bond-apatiteⓇ, 2.20 [1.30–3.11]; freeze-dried bone allograft, 1.35 [0.44–2.26]; Gen-OsⓇ, 1.90 [0.60–3.20]; platelet-rich fibrin, 1.66 [0.66–2.67]; and MP3Ⓡ, 2.67 [1.59–3.75]). Overall, xenograft materials should be considered as among the best of the available grafting materials for alveolar preservation after tooth extraction.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI