J. Majzoub, A. Ravidá, T. Starch-Jensen, M. Tattan, F. Suárez-López Del Amo
{"title":"不同植牙材料对牙槽嵴保存影响的系统综述","authors":"J. Majzoub, A. Ravidá, T. Starch-Jensen, M. Tattan, F. Suárez-López Del Amo","doi":"10.5037/jomr.2019.10306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objectives The purpose of the present review was to evaluate the effect of different bone substitutes used for alveolar ridge preservation on the post extraction dimensional changes. Material and Methods An electronic literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (OVID) and Cochrane (CENTRAL) were performed, in addition to a manual search through all periodontics and implantology-related journals, up to December 2018. Inverse variance weighted means were calculated for all the treatment arms of the included trials for the quantitative analysis. Results Forty randomized controlled trials were included in the quantitative analysis. Dimensional changes were obtained from clinical measurements and three-dimensional imaging. The average amount of horizontal ridge resorption was 1.52 (SD 1.29) mm (allograft), 1.47 (SD 0.92) mm (xenograft), 2.31 (SD 1.19) mm (alloplast) and 3.1 (SD 1.07) mm for unassisted healing. Similarly, for all the evaluated parameters, the spontaneous healing of the socket led to higher bone loss rate than the use of a bone grafting material. Conclusions The utilization of a bone grafting material for alveolar ridge preservation reduces the resorption process occurring after tooth extraction. However, minimal differences in resorption rate were observed between allogeneic, xenogeneic and alloplastic grafting materials.","PeriodicalId":230885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"42","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"J. Majzoub, A. Ravidá, T. Starch-Jensen, M. Tattan, F. Suárez-López Del Amo\",\"doi\":\"10.5037/jomr.2019.10306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objectives The purpose of the present review was to evaluate the effect of different bone substitutes used for alveolar ridge preservation on the post extraction dimensional changes. Material and Methods An electronic literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (OVID) and Cochrane (CENTRAL) were performed, in addition to a manual search through all periodontics and implantology-related journals, up to December 2018. Inverse variance weighted means were calculated for all the treatment arms of the included trials for the quantitative analysis. Results Forty randomized controlled trials were included in the quantitative analysis. Dimensional changes were obtained from clinical measurements and three-dimensional imaging. The average amount of horizontal ridge resorption was 1.52 (SD 1.29) mm (allograft), 1.47 (SD 0.92) mm (xenograft), 2.31 (SD 1.19) mm (alloplast) and 3.1 (SD 1.07) mm for unassisted healing. Similarly, for all the evaluated parameters, the spontaneous healing of the socket led to higher bone loss rate than the use of a bone grafting material. Conclusions The utilization of a bone grafting material for alveolar ridge preservation reduces the resorption process occurring after tooth extraction. However, minimal differences in resorption rate were observed between allogeneic, xenogeneic and alloplastic grafting materials.\",\"PeriodicalId\":230885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"42\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10306\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42
摘要
摘要目的评价不同骨替代物用于牙槽嵴保存对拔牙后牙槽嵴尺寸变化的影响。材料和方法在MEDLINE (PubMed)、EMBASE (OVID)和Cochrane (CENTRAL)中进行电子文献检索,并手动检索截至2018年12月的所有牙周病和种植学相关期刊。为进行定量分析,对纳入试验的所有治疗组计算反方差加权均值。结果定量分析纳入40项随机对照试验。通过临床测量和三维成像获得尺寸变化。平均水平嵴吸收量分别为:同种异体移植1.52 mm (SD 1.29)、异种移植1.47 mm (SD 0.92)、同种异体2.31 mm (SD 1.19)、非辅助愈合3.1 mm (SD 1.07)。同样,在所有评估的参数中,与使用植骨材料相比,窝腔的自发愈合导致更高的骨丢失率。结论采用植骨材料保存牙槽嵴可减少拔牙后牙槽嵴的吸收。然而,在同种异体、异种异体和同种异体移植材料之间观察到的吸收率差异很小。
The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review
ABSTRACT Objectives The purpose of the present review was to evaluate the effect of different bone substitutes used for alveolar ridge preservation on the post extraction dimensional changes. Material and Methods An electronic literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (OVID) and Cochrane (CENTRAL) were performed, in addition to a manual search through all periodontics and implantology-related journals, up to December 2018. Inverse variance weighted means were calculated for all the treatment arms of the included trials for the quantitative analysis. Results Forty randomized controlled trials were included in the quantitative analysis. Dimensional changes were obtained from clinical measurements and three-dimensional imaging. The average amount of horizontal ridge resorption was 1.52 (SD 1.29) mm (allograft), 1.47 (SD 0.92) mm (xenograft), 2.31 (SD 1.19) mm (alloplast) and 3.1 (SD 1.07) mm for unassisted healing. Similarly, for all the evaluated parameters, the spontaneous healing of the socket led to higher bone loss rate than the use of a bone grafting material. Conclusions The utilization of a bone grafting material for alveolar ridge preservation reduces the resorption process occurring after tooth extraction. However, minimal differences in resorption rate were observed between allogeneic, xenogeneic and alloplastic grafting materials.