两阶段上颌窦底抬高骨替代物的比较研究:贝叶斯网络方法。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q3 CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-10 DOI:10.1089/ten.tec.2025.0010
Jiayi Chen
{"title":"两阶段上颌窦底抬高骨替代物的比较研究:贝叶斯网络方法。","authors":"Jiayi Chen","doi":"10.1089/ten.tec.2025.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To investigate the histomorphometric performance of two-stage maxillary sinus floor elevation (TMSFE) with various bone substitutes in the treatment of atrophic posterior maxilla. Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library) were searched from the beginning of database establishment to August 8, 2023. The included articles were limited to the English language. A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the histological performance of various biomaterials in TMSFE with a follow-up of 5-8 months. The main outcome was an area of new bone, and an additional outcome was residual graft material. Extracted data were analyzed by using a Bayesian approach (the Markov chain Monte Carlo) to establish ranks of various biomaterials in R language. Finally, the search identified 22 studies that reported 22 trials on bone area (17 kinds of biomaterials) and 12 studies on residual graft materials (12 kinds of biomaterials) after the exclusion of one study disconnected from the network plot. No local inconsistency could be found in studies regarding bone formation, while no closed loop was detected in residual graft material. The top 3 probabilities of biomaterials in terms of bone formation were Allograft + Xenograft (AG + X) (87.14%), X + Polymer (75.69%), and Autogenous Bone + Bioactive Glass (AB + BG) (71.44%). AG + X had the highest probability (87.14%) of being the most optimal treatment for bone formation. Biphasic calcium phosphate + Fibrin sealant (BCP + FS) was ranked as the slowest absorbing biomaterial (78.27%) in TMSFE. Within the limitations of the current network meta-analysis, AG + X may represent an optimal biomaterial for bone formation in TMSFE. The use of X in combination with other biomaterials demonstrates superior osteogenic effects in TMSFE. BCP + FS exhibited strong mechanical properties during a short-term observational period. The present findings suggest that AB is not the only feasible standard for bone grafts.</p>","PeriodicalId":23154,"journal":{"name":"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods","volume":" ","pages":"130-141"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Insights into Bone Substitutes for Two-Stage Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Bayesian Network Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Jiayi Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/ten.tec.2025.0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To investigate the histomorphometric performance of two-stage maxillary sinus floor elevation (TMSFE) with various bone substitutes in the treatment of atrophic posterior maxilla. Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library) were searched from the beginning of database establishment to August 8, 2023. The included articles were limited to the English language. A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the histological performance of various biomaterials in TMSFE with a follow-up of 5-8 months. The main outcome was an area of new bone, and an additional outcome was residual graft material. Extracted data were analyzed by using a Bayesian approach (the Markov chain Monte Carlo) to establish ranks of various biomaterials in R language. Finally, the search identified 22 studies that reported 22 trials on bone area (17 kinds of biomaterials) and 12 studies on residual graft materials (12 kinds of biomaterials) after the exclusion of one study disconnected from the network plot. No local inconsistency could be found in studies regarding bone formation, while no closed loop was detected in residual graft material. The top 3 probabilities of biomaterials in terms of bone formation were Allograft + Xenograft (AG + X) (87.14%), X + Polymer (75.69%), and Autogenous Bone + Bioactive Glass (AB + BG) (71.44%). AG + X had the highest probability (87.14%) of being the most optimal treatment for bone formation. Biphasic calcium phosphate + Fibrin sealant (BCP + FS) was ranked as the slowest absorbing biomaterial (78.27%) in TMSFE. Within the limitations of the current network meta-analysis, AG + X may represent an optimal biomaterial for bone formation in TMSFE. The use of X in combination with other biomaterials demonstrates superior osteogenic effects in TMSFE. BCP + FS exhibited strong mechanical properties during a short-term observational period. The present findings suggest that AB is not the only feasible standard for bone grafts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23154,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"130-141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tec.2025.0010\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.tec.2025.0010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

探讨不同骨替代物联合两阶段上颌窦底提升术治疗后上颌萎缩的组织形态学效果。检索自数据库建立之初至2023年8月8日的PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和The Cochrane Library四个数据库。纳入的文章仅限于英语。我们进行了系统的检索,以确定随机对照试验,评估TMSFE中各种生物材料的组织学性能,随访5-8个月。主要结果是新骨面积,另外一个结果是残留的移植物材料。利用贝叶斯方法(马尔科夫链蒙特卡罗)对提取的数据进行分析,在R语言中建立各种生物材料的等级。最后,在排除一项与网络图断开的研究后,检索确定了22项研究,其中22项研究报道了22项关于骨面积(17种生物材料)的试验,12项研究报道了残留移植物材料(12种生物材料)。关于骨形成的研究未发现局部不一致,残留移植物材料未发现闭合环。同种异体+异种移植(AG + X)(87.14%)、X +聚合物(75.69%)和自体骨+生物活性玻璃(AB + BG)(71.44%)是生物材料成骨概率最高的前3位。AG + X是骨形成的最佳治疗方法的概率最高(87.14%)。双相磷酸钙+纤维蛋白密封胶(BCP + FS)是TMSFE中吸收最慢的生物材料(78.27%)。在当前网络荟萃分析的限制下,AG + X可能是TMSFE骨形成的最佳生物材料。X与其他生物材料联合使用在TMSFE中显示出优越的成骨效果。BCP + FS在短期观测期内表现出较强的力学性能。目前的研究结果表明,AB并不是骨移植的唯一可行标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Insights into Bone Substitutes for Two-Stage Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Bayesian Network Approach.

To investigate the histomorphometric performance of two-stage maxillary sinus floor elevation (TMSFE) with various bone substitutes in the treatment of atrophic posterior maxilla. Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library) were searched from the beginning of database establishment to August 8, 2023. The included articles were limited to the English language. A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the histological performance of various biomaterials in TMSFE with a follow-up of 5-8 months. The main outcome was an area of new bone, and an additional outcome was residual graft material. Extracted data were analyzed by using a Bayesian approach (the Markov chain Monte Carlo) to establish ranks of various biomaterials in R language. Finally, the search identified 22 studies that reported 22 trials on bone area (17 kinds of biomaterials) and 12 studies on residual graft materials (12 kinds of biomaterials) after the exclusion of one study disconnected from the network plot. No local inconsistency could be found in studies regarding bone formation, while no closed loop was detected in residual graft material. The top 3 probabilities of biomaterials in terms of bone formation were Allograft + Xenograft (AG + X) (87.14%), X + Polymer (75.69%), and Autogenous Bone + Bioactive Glass (AB + BG) (71.44%). AG + X had the highest probability (87.14%) of being the most optimal treatment for bone formation. Biphasic calcium phosphate + Fibrin sealant (BCP + FS) was ranked as the slowest absorbing biomaterial (78.27%) in TMSFE. Within the limitations of the current network meta-analysis, AG + X may represent an optimal biomaterial for bone formation in TMSFE. The use of X in combination with other biomaterials demonstrates superior osteogenic effects in TMSFE. BCP + FS exhibited strong mechanical properties during a short-term observational period. The present findings suggest that AB is not the only feasible standard for bone grafts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods
Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.30%
发文量
136
期刊介绍: Tissue Engineering is the preeminent, biomedical journal advancing the field with cutting-edge research and applications that repair or regenerate portions or whole tissues. This multidisciplinary journal brings together the principles of engineering and life sciences in the creation of artificial tissues and regenerative medicine. Tissue Engineering is divided into three parts, providing a central forum for groundbreaking scientific research and developments of clinical applications from leading experts in the field that will enable the functional replacement of tissues. Tissue Engineering Methods (Part C) presents innovative tools and assays in scaffold development, stem cells and biologically active molecules to advance the field and to support clinical translation. Part C publishes monthly.
×
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