The clinical outcome of bone cement in dental implant insertion – A systematic review

M. Shah
{"title":"The clinical outcome of bone cement in dental implant insertion – A systematic review","authors":"M. Shah","doi":"10.4103/jdi.jdi_11_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: To accelerate the process of restoring dental implants, achieving primary stability is of prime importance for effective osseointegration. The various bone substitute materials such as autograft (golden standard), allograft, xenograft, and alloplast are used to improve the stability of an implant and also as an aid in bone formation. The use of bone cements, among the alloplast material, is a relatively new premise in oral implantology. These have been extensively used in orthopedic surgery to secure an implanted prosthesis and to replace or bind bone fragments, resulting from trauma, and to fill cavities. This article aims to review the literature for the use of bone cements in oral implantology and evaluate its prospective use in future to secure dental implants. Materials and Methods: PubMed search was carried out using keywords such as “Bone Cements,” “Oral Implantology,” “Cements Fix Implants with Bone,” and “Cements to Grow Bone.” Of the 1422 articles, 1015 were selected after eliminating the duplicates. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 383 abstracts were assessed for relevance, of which 17 full-text articles were selected. Five articles were excluded with reasons and 12 eligible articles were included in the systematic review. Results: Eight studies out of the 12 concluded that bone cement could be a viable alternative to allogenic or other graft materials tested. Four articles were inconclusive or showed no significant difference. However, the quality of available evidence was poor as 10 out of the 12 studies were animal trials and 2 were in vitro studies. Due to considerable heterogeneity of data, meta-analysis could not be done. Conclusion: Bone cements can be considered a possible alternative to the existing graft materials. However, further research including controlled trials with human subjects needs to be undertaken to establish its potential.","PeriodicalId":212982,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Implants","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jdi.jdi_11_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: To accelerate the process of restoring dental implants, achieving primary stability is of prime importance for effective osseointegration. The various bone substitute materials such as autograft (golden standard), allograft, xenograft, and alloplast are used to improve the stability of an implant and also as an aid in bone formation. The use of bone cements, among the alloplast material, is a relatively new premise in oral implantology. These have been extensively used in orthopedic surgery to secure an implanted prosthesis and to replace or bind bone fragments, resulting from trauma, and to fill cavities. This article aims to review the literature for the use of bone cements in oral implantology and evaluate its prospective use in future to secure dental implants. Materials and Methods: PubMed search was carried out using keywords such as “Bone Cements,” “Oral Implantology,” “Cements Fix Implants with Bone,” and “Cements to Grow Bone.” Of the 1422 articles, 1015 were selected after eliminating the duplicates. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 383 abstracts were assessed for relevance, of which 17 full-text articles were selected. Five articles were excluded with reasons and 12 eligible articles were included in the systematic review. Results: Eight studies out of the 12 concluded that bone cement could be a viable alternative to allogenic or other graft materials tested. Four articles were inconclusive or showed no significant difference. However, the quality of available evidence was poor as 10 out of the 12 studies were animal trials and 2 were in vitro studies. Due to considerable heterogeneity of data, meta-analysis could not be done. Conclusion: Bone cements can be considered a possible alternative to the existing graft materials. However, further research including controlled trials with human subjects needs to be undertaken to establish its potential.
骨水泥在牙种植体插入中的临床效果综述
为了加速牙种植体的修复过程,获得初级稳定性对有效的骨整合至关重要。各种骨替代材料,如自体移植物(黄金标准)、同种异体移植物、异种移植物和同种异体被用来提高种植体的稳定性,也作为骨形成的辅助。在同种异体材料中,骨水泥的使用是口腔种植的一个相对较新的前提。在骨科手术中,它们被广泛用于固定植入的假体,替换或粘合因创伤而产生的骨碎片,以及填充腔体。本文旨在回顾骨水泥在口腔种植中的应用,并评估其在未来固定种植体中的应用前景。材料和方法:使用“骨水泥”、“口腔种植学”、“骨水泥固定种植体”和“骨水泥生长”等关键词进行PubMed搜索。在1422篇文献中,剔除重复文献后筛选出1015篇。应用纳入和排除标准对383篇摘要进行相关性评估,其中选取了17篇全文文章。排除了5篇有原因的文章,12篇符合条件的文章纳入系统评价。结果:12项研究中有8项得出结论,骨水泥可以替代同种异体或其他移植材料。四篇文章不确定或没有显示显著差异。然而,现有证据的质量很差,因为12项研究中有10项是动物试验,2项是体外研究。由于数据的异质性较大,无法进行meta分析。结论:骨水泥是一种可以替代现有骨移植材料的材料。然而,需要进行进一步的研究,包括对人类受试者进行对照试验,以确定其潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信