Long-term Clinical Performance of Regeneration versus Conservative Surgery in the Treatment of Infra-bony Defects:A systematic review.

Muhammad Saad Shaikh, Flavio Pisani, Danila De Vito, Mohid Abrar Lone, Maher Almasri
{"title":"Long-term Clinical Performance of Regeneration versus Conservative Surgery in the Treatment of Infra-bony Defects:A systematic review.","authors":"Muhammad Saad Shaikh,&nbsp;Flavio Pisani,&nbsp;Danila De Vito,&nbsp;Mohid Abrar Lone,&nbsp;Maher Almasri","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To determine the differences in the long-term clinical outcomes between Regeneration (REG) and Conservative Surgery (CS) in infra-bony defects.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three databases were searched [PubMed, Medline and Embase] up to April 2019. Following screening, 17 studies were included. Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials, Controlled Clinical Trials and retrospective studies with long-term clinical observations (≥ 24-months) were selected. After subgrouping the studies regarding the grafting material and the used flap, meta-analysis was performed for different outcomes [clinical attachment level gain (CALGain), probing pocket depth reduction (PPDRed), recession increase (RECInc) and bone fill (BF)] at different follow-ups (24-, 36-, 48- to 60- and 120- to 240-months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The time-related meta-analysis favoured REG at every interval for every outcome. In subgroup analysis, enamel matrix derivative (EMD) performed significantly better for both CALGain [24- (p less than 0.0001), 36- (p=0.02) and 60-months (p less than 0.00001)] and PPDRed [24- (p=0.0004), 36- (p=0.003) and 60-months (p less than 0.00001)]. For Ceramic Grafts (CGs), CALGain at 48-months (p less than 0.00001) and PPDRed at 24- (p=0.0006), 36- (p less than 0.00001) and 48-months (p less than 0.00001) follow-up showed better results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The better outcomes from REG using EMD or CGs can be maintained for a longer duration, suggesting a potential longevity of the occurred healing.</p>","PeriodicalId":17281,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Academy of Periodontology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Academy of Periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To determine the differences in the long-term clinical outcomes between Regeneration (REG) and Conservative Surgery (CS) in infra-bony defects.

Materials and methods: Three databases were searched [PubMed, Medline and Embase] up to April 2019. Following screening, 17 studies were included. Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials, Controlled Clinical Trials and retrospective studies with long-term clinical observations (≥ 24-months) were selected. After subgrouping the studies regarding the grafting material and the used flap, meta-analysis was performed for different outcomes [clinical attachment level gain (CALGain), probing pocket depth reduction (PPDRed), recession increase (RECInc) and bone fill (BF)] at different follow-ups (24-, 36-, 48- to 60- and 120- to 240-months).

Results: The time-related meta-analysis favoured REG at every interval for every outcome. In subgroup analysis, enamel matrix derivative (EMD) performed significantly better for both CALGain [24- (p less than 0.0001), 36- (p=0.02) and 60-months (p less than 0.00001)] and PPDRed [24- (p=0.0004), 36- (p=0.003) and 60-months (p less than 0.00001)]. For Ceramic Grafts (CGs), CALGain at 48-months (p less than 0.00001) and PPDRed at 24- (p=0.0006), 36- (p less than 0.00001) and 48-months (p less than 0.00001) follow-up showed better results.

Conclusion: The better outcomes from REG using EMD or CGs can be maintained for a longer duration, suggesting a potential longevity of the occurred healing.

再生与保守手术治疗骨下缺损的长期临床表现:一项系统综述。
目的:探讨骨下缺损再生(REG)与保守手术(CS)长期临床疗效的差异。材料和方法:截至2019年4月检索了三个数据库[PubMed, Medline和Embase]。筛选后,纳入了17项研究。选择随机对照临床试验、对照临床试验和具有长期临床观察(≥24个月)的回顾性研究。在对移植材料和所用皮瓣的研究进行亚分组后,对不同随访(24、36、48至60和120至240个月)的不同结果[临床附着水平增加(CALGain)、探查袋深度减少(PPDRed)、衰退增加(RECInc)和骨填充(BF)]进行meta分析。结果:与时间相关的荟萃分析在每个结果的每个间隔都支持REG。在亚组分析中,牙釉质基质衍生物(EMD)在CALGain [24- (p < 0.0001), 36- (p=0.02)和60个月(p < 0.00001)]和PPDRed [24- (p=0.0004), 36- (p=0.003)和60个月(p < 0.00001)]的表现明显更好。对于陶瓷移植物(CGs), 48个月时的CALGain (p < 0.00001)和24- (p=0.0006)、36- (p < 0.00001)和48个月时的PPDRed (p < 0.00001)的随访效果较好。结论:使用EMD或CGs的REG效果较好,可以维持更长的时间,表明已经发生的愈合可能延长。
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