Cargando…

Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of fibrin sealant compared to sutures in periodontal surgery. METHODS: Five electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Cochrane and Web of Science) were screened from initiation to January 2021 for randomized controlled...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mounsif, Mariam, Smouni, Fatima ezzahraa, Bouziane, Amal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9052248/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35495382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103539
_version_ 1784696745294299136
author Mounsif, Mariam
Smouni, Fatima ezzahraa
Bouziane, Amal
author_facet Mounsif, Mariam
Smouni, Fatima ezzahraa
Bouziane, Amal
author_sort Mounsif, Mariam
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of fibrin sealant compared to sutures in periodontal surgery. METHODS: Five electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Cochrane and Web of Science) were screened from initiation to January 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery using this search equation: (Periodont* OR Periodontitis) AND (“fibrin tissue adhesive” OR “fibrin glue” OR “fibrin sealant” OR “fibrin sealant system” OR “fibrin adhesive system” OR “fibrin fibronectin sealant system”). Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2). The level of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: A total of 240 publications were found as search results in the screened databases. Four RCTs were included in this systematic review based on predetermined inclusion criteria. The trials were published between 1987 and 2014. All the RCTs compared fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery. The sample size included 101 patients. The overall risk of bias in this systematic review was at high risk in 75% of the studies, while 25% of the studies raised some concerns. The level of evidence evaluated using GRADE tool was very low. DISCUSSION: The current systematic review indicates a low level of evidence of the use of fibrin sealant as an alternative to sutures in periodontal practice. More interventional and multicentric studies should be conducted to support and confirm the results of the included studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9052248
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90522482022-04-30 Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review Mounsif, Mariam Smouni, Fatima ezzahraa Bouziane, Amal Ann Med Surg (Lond) Systematic Review / Meta-analysis BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of fibrin sealant compared to sutures in periodontal surgery. METHODS: Five electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Cochrane and Web of Science) were screened from initiation to January 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery using this search equation: (Periodont* OR Periodontitis) AND (“fibrin tissue adhesive” OR “fibrin glue” OR “fibrin sealant” OR “fibrin sealant system” OR “fibrin adhesive system” OR “fibrin fibronectin sealant system”). Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2). The level of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: A total of 240 publications were found as search results in the screened databases. Four RCTs were included in this systematic review based on predetermined inclusion criteria. The trials were published between 1987 and 2014. All the RCTs compared fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery. The sample size included 101 patients. The overall risk of bias in this systematic review was at high risk in 75% of the studies, while 25% of the studies raised some concerns. The level of evidence evaluated using GRADE tool was very low. DISCUSSION: The current systematic review indicates a low level of evidence of the use of fibrin sealant as an alternative to sutures in periodontal practice. More interventional and multicentric studies should be conducted to support and confirm the results of the included studies. Elsevier 2022-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9052248/ /pubmed/35495382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103539 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review / Meta-analysis
Mounsif, Mariam
Smouni, Fatima ezzahraa
Bouziane, Amal
Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title_full Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title_fullStr Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title_short Fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: A systematic review
title_sort fibrin sealant versus sutures in periodontal surgery: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review / Meta-analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9052248/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35495382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103539
work_keys_str_mv AT mounsifmariam fibrinsealantversussuturesinperiodontalsurgeryasystematicreview
AT smounifatimaezzahraa fibrinsealantversussuturesinperiodontalsurgeryasystematicreview
AT bouzianeamal fibrinsealantversussuturesinperiodontalsurgeryasystematicreview