Cargando…
Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review
Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before impla...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9655824/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36362575 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11216347 |
_version_ | 1784829281507999744 |
---|---|
author | Isola, Gaetano Nucera, Riccardo Damonte, Silvia Ugolini, Alessandro De Mari, Anna Migliorati, Marco |
author_facet | Isola, Gaetano Nucera, Riccardo Damonte, Silvia Ugolini, Alessandro De Mari, Anna Migliorati, Marco |
author_sort | Isola, Gaetano |
collection | PubMed |
description | Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9655824 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96558242022-11-15 Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review Isola, Gaetano Nucera, Riccardo Damonte, Silvia Ugolini, Alessandro De Mari, Anna Migliorati, Marco J Clin Med Review Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue. MDPI 2022-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9655824/ /pubmed/36362575 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11216347 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Isola, Gaetano Nucera, Riccardo Damonte, Silvia Ugolini, Alessandro De Mari, Anna Migliorati, Marco Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | implant site changes in three different clinical approaches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9655824/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36362575 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11216347 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT isolagaetano implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview AT nucerariccardo implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview AT damontesilvia implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview AT ugolinialessandro implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview AT demarianna implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview AT miglioratimarco implantsitechangesinthreedifferentclinicalapproachesorthodonticextrusionregenerativesurgeryandspontaneoushealingafterextractionasystematicreview |