Cargando…
Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6747264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31466409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174221 |
_version_ | 1783451861861269504 |
---|---|
author | Tumedei, Margherita Savadori, Paolo Del Fabbro, Massimo |
author_facet | Tumedei, Margherita Savadori, Paolo Del Fabbro, Massimo |
author_sort | Tumedei, Margherita |
collection | PubMed |
description | This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79%, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44%, 95% CI: 0.71, 8.17%, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6747264 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67472642019-09-27 Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Tumedei, Margherita Savadori, Paolo Del Fabbro, Massimo Int J Mol Sci Review This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79%, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44%, 95% CI: 0.71, 8.17%, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures. MDPI 2019-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6747264/ /pubmed/31466409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174221 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Tumedei, Margherita Savadori, Paolo Del Fabbro, Massimo Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | synthetic blocks for bone regeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6747264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31466409 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms20174221 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tumedeimargherita syntheticblocksforboneregenerationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT savadoripaolo syntheticblocksforboneregenerationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT delfabbromassimo syntheticblocksforboneregenerationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |