Ingra Tais Malacarne, Wilton Mitsunari Takeshita, Ana Claudia Muniz Renno, Daniel Araki Ribeiro
{"title":"牙种植体体外和体内的遗传毒性?荟萃分析的系统评价","authors":"Ingra Tais Malacarne, Wilton Mitsunari Takeshita, Ana Claudia Muniz Renno, Daniel Araki Ribeiro","doi":"10.1007/s44174-023-00128-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this systematic review was designed to help further elucidate the following question: Are dental implants able to induce DNA damage in vitro or in vivo? The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA-P guidelines. After searching the literature, full manuscripts from 19 studies were carefully selected by the authors. Regarding the general characteristics, endosseous implant was studied in ten manuscripts, and titanium disks were researched by 4 authors; two studies evaluated more than one type of material: titanium miniplates and endosseous implants, cylinders; endosseous implants and rectangular-shaped titanium miniplates, ceramic composites and titanium particles were research objects only once. Following the parameters for evaluating the risk assessment, 7 manuscripts had strong scores, another 8 papers reached the moderate score, and another 4 scored poorly. The meta-analysis data did not reveal a statistically significant difference in the micronucleated cells of the dental implants patients compared to the control (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI − 0.12 to 0.56, p = 0.20), with a Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 0.01, and p = 0.92, so that the selected manuscripts were considered homogeneous and the I2 of 0% indicated low heterogeneity. In our findings, after evaluating the works, it was observed that the results of the characteristics of the dental implants did not induce genotoxicity.","PeriodicalId":72388,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.)","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Genotoxicity Induced by Dental Implants In Vitro and In Vivo? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ingra Tais Malacarne, Wilton Mitsunari Takeshita, Ana Claudia Muniz Renno, Daniel Araki Ribeiro\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44174-023-00128-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this systematic review was designed to help further elucidate the following question: Are dental implants able to induce DNA damage in vitro or in vivo? The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA-P guidelines. After searching the literature, full manuscripts from 19 studies were carefully selected by the authors. Regarding the general characteristics, endosseous implant was studied in ten manuscripts, and titanium disks were researched by 4 authors; two studies evaluated more than one type of material: titanium miniplates and endosseous implants, cylinders; endosseous implants and rectangular-shaped titanium miniplates, ceramic composites and titanium particles were research objects only once. Following the parameters for evaluating the risk assessment, 7 manuscripts had strong scores, another 8 papers reached the moderate score, and another 4 scored poorly. The meta-analysis data did not reveal a statistically significant difference in the micronucleated cells of the dental implants patients compared to the control (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI − 0.12 to 0.56, p = 0.20), with a Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 0.01, and p = 0.92, so that the selected manuscripts were considered homogeneous and the I2 of 0% indicated low heterogeneity. In our findings, after evaluating the works, it was observed that the results of the characteristics of the dental implants did not induce genotoxicity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72388,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.)\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44174-023-00128-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44174-023-00128-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本系统综述的目的是帮助进一步阐明以下问题:牙种植体是否能够在体外或体内诱导DNA损伤?系统评价按照PRISMA-P指南进行。在检索文献后,作者精心挑选了19项研究的完整手稿。就一般特点而言,10篇文章研究了内种植体,4篇文章研究了钛盘;两项研究评估了一种以上的材料:钛微型钢板和骨内植入物,圆柱体;骨内植入物和矩形微型钛板、陶瓷复合材料和钛颗粒仅为一次研究对象。按照风险评估的评价参数,7篇文章得分高,8篇文章得分中等,4篇文章得分低。meta分析数据未显示种植牙组患者的微核细胞与对照组相比有统计学差异(SMD = 0.22, 95% CI - 0.12 ~ 0.56, p = 0.20), Tau2 = 0.00;Chi2 = 0.01, p = 0.92,认为所选稿件具有同质性,I2 = 0%表示异质性较低。在我们的研究结果中,在评估工作后,观察到种植体的特性结果不会引起遗传毒性。
Genotoxicity Induced by Dental Implants In Vitro and In Vivo? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
The aim of this systematic review was designed to help further elucidate the following question: Are dental implants able to induce DNA damage in vitro or in vivo? The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA-P guidelines. After searching the literature, full manuscripts from 19 studies were carefully selected by the authors. Regarding the general characteristics, endosseous implant was studied in ten manuscripts, and titanium disks were researched by 4 authors; two studies evaluated more than one type of material: titanium miniplates and endosseous implants, cylinders; endosseous implants and rectangular-shaped titanium miniplates, ceramic composites and titanium particles were research objects only once. Following the parameters for evaluating the risk assessment, 7 manuscripts had strong scores, another 8 papers reached the moderate score, and another 4 scored poorly. The meta-analysis data did not reveal a statistically significant difference in the micronucleated cells of the dental implants patients compared to the control (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI − 0.12 to 0.56, p = 0.20), with a Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 0.01, and p = 0.92, so that the selected manuscripts were considered homogeneous and the I2 of 0% indicated low heterogeneity. In our findings, after evaluating the works, it was observed that the results of the characteristics of the dental implants did not induce genotoxicity.