Cargando…
The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review
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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Stilus Optimus
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6788425/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31620268 http://dx.doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10306 |
_version_ | 1783458487501586432 |
---|---|
author | Majzoub, Jad Ravida, Andrea Starch-Jensen, Thomas Tattan, Mustafa Suárez-López del Amo, Fernando |
author_facet | Majzoub, Jad Ravida, Andrea Starch-Jensen, Thomas Tattan, Mustafa Suárez-López del Amo, Fernando |
author_sort | Majzoub, Jad |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6788425 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Stilus Optimus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67884252019-10-16 The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review Majzoub, Jad Ravida, Andrea Starch-Jensen, Thomas Tattan, Mustafa Suárez-López del Amo, Fernando J Oral Maxillofac Res Literature Review 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. Stilus Optimus 2019-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6788425/ /pubmed/31620268 http://dx.doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10306 Text en Copyright © Majzoub J, Ravida A, Starch-Jensen T, Tattan M, Suárez-López del Amo F. Published in the JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH (http://www.ejomr.org), 5 September 2019. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open-access article, first published in the JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL RESEARCH, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 UnportedLicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work and is properly cited. The copyright, license information and link to the original publication on (http://www.ejomr.org) must be included. |
spellingShingle | Literature Review Majzoub, Jad Ravida, Andrea Starch-Jensen, Thomas Tattan, Mustafa Suárez-López del Amo, Fernando The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title | The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title_full | The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title_short | The Influence of Different Grafting Materials on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: a Systematic Review |
title_sort | influence of different grafting materials on alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review |
topic | Literature Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6788425/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31620268 http://dx.doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2019.10306 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT majzoubjad theinfluenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT ravidaandrea theinfluenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT starchjensenthomas theinfluenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT tattanmustafa theinfluenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT suarezlopezdelamofernando theinfluenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT majzoubjad influenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT ravidaandrea influenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT starchjensenthomas influenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT tattanmustafa influenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview AT suarezlopezdelamofernando influenceofdifferentgraftingmaterialsonalveolarridgepreservationasystematicreview |