Cargando…
Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of using a bone substitute material (BSM) in the fixture–socket gap in patients undergoing tooth extraction and immediate implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs wer...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8453723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34118175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13014 |
_version_ | 1784570330819330048 |
---|---|
author | Zaki, John Yusuf, Nermin El‐Khadem, Ahmed Scholten, Rob J. P. M. Jenniskens, Kevin |
author_facet | Zaki, John Yusuf, Nermin El‐Khadem, Ahmed Scholten, Rob J. P. M. Jenniskens, Kevin |
author_sort | Zaki, John |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of using a bone substitute material (BSM) in the fixture–socket gap in patients undergoing tooth extraction and immediate implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs were screened for eligibility, and data were extracted by two authors independently. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using Cochrane's ROB tool 2.0. Primary outcomes were implant failure, overall complications, and soft‐tissue esthetics. Secondary outcomes were vertical buccal bone resorption, vertical interproximal bone resorption, horizontal buccal bone resorption, and mid‐buccal mucosal recession. Meta‐analysis was performed using random‐effects model with generic inverse variance weighing. GRADE was used to grade the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: After screening 19 544 potentially eligible references, 20 RCTs were included in this review, with a total of 848 patients (916 sites). Most included RCTs were deemed of some concerns (53%) or at low (38%) risk of bias, except for overall complications (high ROB). Implant failure did not differ significantly RR = 0.92 (confidence intervals [CI] 0.34 to 2.46) between using a BSM compared with not using a BSM (NoBSM). BSM use resulted in less horizontal buccal bone resorption (MD = −0.52 mm [95% CI −0.74 to −0.30]), a higher esthetic score (MD = 1.49 [95% CI 0.46 to 2.53]), but also more complications (RR = 3.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 11.1] compared with NoBSM. Too few trials compared types of BSMs against each other to allow for pooled analyses. The certainty of the evidence was considered moderate for all outcomes except implant failure (low), overall complications (very low), and vertical interproximal bone resorption (very low). CONCLUSION: BSM use during immediate implant placement reduces horizontal buccal bone resorption and improves the periimplant soft‐tissue esthetics. Although BSM use increases the risk of predominantly minor complications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8453723 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84537232021-09-27 Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis Zaki, John Yusuf, Nermin El‐Khadem, Ahmed Scholten, Rob J. P. M. Jenniskens, Kevin Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of using a bone substitute material (BSM) in the fixture–socket gap in patients undergoing tooth extraction and immediate implant placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs were screened for eligibility, and data were extracted by two authors independently. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using Cochrane's ROB tool 2.0. Primary outcomes were implant failure, overall complications, and soft‐tissue esthetics. Secondary outcomes were vertical buccal bone resorption, vertical interproximal bone resorption, horizontal buccal bone resorption, and mid‐buccal mucosal recession. Meta‐analysis was performed using random‐effects model with generic inverse variance weighing. GRADE was used to grade the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: After screening 19 544 potentially eligible references, 20 RCTs were included in this review, with a total of 848 patients (916 sites). Most included RCTs were deemed of some concerns (53%) or at low (38%) risk of bias, except for overall complications (high ROB). Implant failure did not differ significantly RR = 0.92 (confidence intervals [CI] 0.34 to 2.46) between using a BSM compared with not using a BSM (NoBSM). BSM use resulted in less horizontal buccal bone resorption (MD = −0.52 mm [95% CI −0.74 to −0.30]), a higher esthetic score (MD = 1.49 [95% CI 0.46 to 2.53]), but also more complications (RR = 3.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 11.1] compared with NoBSM. Too few trials compared types of BSMs against each other to allow for pooled analyses. The certainty of the evidence was considered moderate for all outcomes except implant failure (low), overall complications (very low), and vertical interproximal bone resorption (very low). CONCLUSION: BSM use during immediate implant placement reduces horizontal buccal bone resorption and improves the periimplant soft‐tissue esthetics. Although BSM use increases the risk of predominantly minor complications. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-06-12 2021-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8453723/ /pubmed/34118175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13014 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis Zaki, John Yusuf, Nermin El‐Khadem, Ahmed Scholten, Rob J. P. M. Jenniskens, Kevin Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title | Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_full | Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_short | Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_sort | efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: a systematic review and meta‐analysis |
topic | Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8453723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34118175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.13014 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zakijohn efficacyofbonesubstitutematerialsuseinimmediatedentalimplantplacementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yusufnermin efficacyofbonesubstitutematerialsuseinimmediatedentalimplantplacementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT elkhademahmed efficacyofbonesubstitutematerialsuseinimmediatedentalimplantplacementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT scholtenrobjpm efficacyofbonesubstitutematerialsuseinimmediatedentalimplantplacementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jenniskenskevin efficacyofbonesubstitutematerialsuseinimmediatedentalimplantplacementasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |