The influence of vertical ridge augmentation techniques on peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 3.7 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Pub Date : 2023-12-19 DOI:10.1111/cid.13282

Alessandro Cucchi, Francesco Maiani, Debora Franceschi, Michele Sassano, Antonino Fiorino, Istvan A. Urban, Giuseppe Corinaldesi

{"title":"The influence of vertical ridge augmentation techniques on peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Alessandro Cucchi, Francesco Maiani, Debora Franceschi, Michele Sassano, Antonino Fiorino, Istvan A. Urban, Giuseppe Corinaldesi","doi":"10.1111/cid.13282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate and compare the outcomes of different vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) techniques in relation to peri-implant bone loss (PBL), after at least 12 months of functional loading.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and methods</h3>\n \n <p>The search was conducted to find all the studies about VRA and measurements of PBL with at least 12 months follow-up. Three pairwise meta-analysis (MA) was performed to completely evaluate the outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 42 studies were included, of which 11 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). RCTs were available only for guided bone regeneration (GBR), onlay, and inlay techniques. The weighted mean estimate (WME) of PBL value was found to be 1.38 mm (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.10–1.66) after a mean follow-up of 41.0 ± 27.8 months. GBR, Inlay, Onlay, osteodistraction, and SBB represented in weight 32.9%, 30.6%, 25.0%, 7.6%, and 3.9%, respectively; and their WME (95% CI) were 1.06 (0.87–1.26) mm, 1.72 (1.00–2.43) mm, 1.31 (0.87–1.75) mm, 1.81 (0.87–1.75) mm, and 0.66 (0.55–0.77) mm, respectively. Among the secondary outcomes, the analysis was conducted for vertical bone gain, healing complication rate, surgical complication rate, implant survival, and success rate.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The primary findings of the meta-analysis, based on the changes between final and baseline values, showed that the peri-implant bone loss could be influenced by the type of intervention but there is a need to evaluate in RCTs the behavior of the peri-implant bone levels after long-term follow-up for all techniques.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"15-65"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cid.13282","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13282","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate and compare the outcomes of different vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) techniques in relation to peri-implant bone loss (PBL), after at least 12 months of functional loading.

Material and methods

The search was conducted to find all the studies about VRA and measurements of PBL with at least 12 months follow-up. Three pairwise meta-analysis (MA) was performed to completely evaluate the outcomes.

Results

A total of 42 studies were included, of which 11 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). RCTs were available only for guided bone regeneration (GBR), onlay, and inlay techniques. The weighted mean estimate (WME) of PBL value was found to be 1.38 mm (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.10–1.66) after a mean follow-up of 41.0 ± 27.8 months. GBR, Inlay, Onlay, osteodistraction, and SBB represented in weight 32.9%, 30.6%, 25.0%, 7.6%, and 3.9%, respectively; and their WME (95% CI) were 1.06 (0.87–1.26) mm, 1.72 (1.00–2.43) mm, 1.31 (0.87–1.75) mm, 1.81 (0.87–1.75) mm, and 0.66 (0.55–0.77) mm, respectively. Among the secondary outcomes, the analysis was conducted for vertical bone gain, healing complication rate, surgical complication rate, implant survival, and success rate.

Conclusions

The primary findings of the meta-analysis, based on the changes between final and baseline values, showed that the peri-implant bone loss could be influenced by the type of intervention but there is a need to evaluate in RCTs the behavior of the peri-implant bone levels after long-term follow-up for all techniques.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

垂直脊增量技术对种植体周围骨质流失的影响：系统回顾与荟萃分析。

简介：本系统性综述的主要目的是研究和比较不同的垂直脊增量（VRA）技术在至少12个月的功能负荷后与种植体周围骨质流失（PBL）有关的结果：材料和方法：我们搜索了所有关于 VRA 和 PBL 测量的研究，并进行了至少 12 个月的随访。结果：共纳入了 42 项研究，其中有 3 项研究的结果是相同的：结果：共纳入 42 项研究，其中 11 项为随机临床试验（RCT）。仅有引导骨再生（GBR）、镶嵌和嵌体技术的随机临床试验。经过平均 41.0 ± 27.8 个月的随访，发现 PBL 值的加权平均估计值 (WME) 为 1.38 mm（95% 置信区间 [95% CI]：1.10-1.66）。GBR、Inlay、Onlay、骨牵引和SBB在重量上分别占32.9%、30.6%、25.0%、7.6%和3.9%；其WME（95% CI）分别为1.06（0.87-1.26）毫米、1.72（1.00-2.43）毫米、1.31（0.87-1.75）毫米、1.81（0.87-1.75）毫米和0.66（0.55-0.77）毫米。在次要结果中，对垂直骨增量、愈合并发症发生率、手术并发症发生率、种植体存活率和成功率进行了分析：根据最终值和基线值之间的变化进行的荟萃分析的主要结果表明，种植体周围骨质流失可能受到干预类型的影响，但有必要在研究性临床试验中评估所有技术长期随访后种植体周围骨质水平的变化情况。

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

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

6.00

自引率

13.90%

发文量

103

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal. The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to: New scientific developments relating to bone Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues Computer aided implant designs Computer aided prosthetic designs Immediate implant loading Immediate implant placement Materials relating to bone induction and conduction New surgical methods relating to implant placement New materials and methods relating to implant restorations Methods for determining implant stability A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.