Quality assessment of systematic reviews on vertical bone regeneration

Saletta, J.M.; García, Jaime Jiménez; Caramês, João; Schliephake, Henning; Marques, Duarte

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2018.07.014

Cited by 34 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result can be associated to many factors: the use of a mixture of the autogenous and xenogenous graft with rapid and slow reabsorption, respectively; the addition of i-PRF and growth factors to this mixture; the graft immobilization using biocompatible membranes associated with isolation of epithelial and connective cells; flap closure and first intention healing, avoiding membrane exposures and postoperative complications. Thus, the present study corroborates with the literature by demonstrating that the bone augmentation obtained with the GBR method is predictable, with fewer associated complications and stable implant installation [4,39,41]. However, despite the good clinical results in terms of bone gain observed with the proposed protocol, this study has the limitation of small sample size and the absence of the control group.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…For horizontal gain, autogenous and allogeneic block grafts; autogenous, xenogenous, and alloplastic particulate grafts; expansion of the alveolar crest; and guided bone regeneration (GBR) have been proposed [1,3]. As an alternative for vertical loss, short implants (smaller than 7 mm), lateralization of the lower alveolar nerve, autogenous block graft, osteogenic distraction, use of growth factors and tissue engineering, and GBR were described [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The use of guided bone regeneration (GBR) for vertical and horizontal bone gain is a predictable approach to correct the bone defects before implant installation; however, the use of different protocols is associated with different clinical results. It is suggested that platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) could improve the outcomes of regenerative procedures. Thus, this study aimed to describe the bone gain associated with GBR procedures combining membranes, bone grafts, and PRF for vertical and horizontal bone augmentation. Materials and methods Eighteen patients who needed vertical or horizontal bone regeneration before installing dental implants were included in the study. The horizontal bone defects were treated with a GBR protocol that includes the use of a mixture of particulate autogenous and xenogenous grafts in the proportion of 1:1, injectable form of PRF (i-PRF) to agglutinate the graft, an absorbable collagen membrane covering the regenerated region, and leukocyte PRF (L-PRF) membrane covering the GBR membrane. The vertical bone defects were treated with the same grafted mixture protected by a titanium-reinforced non-resorbable high-density polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE-Ti) membrane and covered by L-PRF. The bone gain was measured using a cone-beam computed tomography at baseline and after a period of 7.5 (± 1.0) months. Results All patients underwent surgery to install implants after this regenerative protocol. The GBR produces an increase in bone thickness (p < 0.001) and height (p < 0.005) after treatment, with a bone gain of 5.9 ± 2.4 for horizontal defects and 5.6 ± 2.6 for vertical defects. In horizontal defects, the gain was higher in the maxilla than in mandible (p = 0.014) and in anterior than the posterior region (p = 0.033). No differences related to GBR location were observed in vertical defects (p > 0.05). Conclusion GBR associated with a mixture of particulate autogenous and xenogenous grafts and i-PRF is effective for vertical and horizontal bone augmentation in maxillary and mandibular regions, permitting sufficient bone gain to future implant placement. Trial registration REBEC, RBR-3CSG3J. Date of registration—19 July 2019, retrospectively registered. http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-3csg3j/

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Then, the risk of bias (RoB) of each study was categorized according to the final score as ‘high’ (score equal or lower than 49%, which lead to article exclusion), ‘moderate’ (score ranging from 50% to 69%) or ‘low’ (score higher than 70%) (Saletta et al . ).…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The final score of each study applied to the JBI questions was calculated based on the percentage of positive answers ('yes') only. Then, the risk of bias (RoB) of each study was categorized according to the final score as 'high' (score equal or lower than 49%, which lead to article exclusion), 'moderate' (score ranging from 50% to 69%) or 'low' (score higher than 70%) (Saletta et al 2019).…”

Section: Scientific Merit Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of C‐shaped canal morphology using cone beam computed tomography – a systematic review with meta‐analysis

Martins

Marques

Silva³

et al. 2019

Int Endodontic J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aim To perform a systematic review of anatomical studies using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to assess the influence of demographic factors (age, gender and geographic region) on the prevalence of C‐shaped canal anatomy in maxillary molars, mandibular premolars and molars. Data sources A search was conducted between May and August 2018 in four electronic databases and five peer‐reviewed journals. The authors of included articles were also contacted for additional studies and the bibliographic references hand‐searched. Study eligibility criteria, participants and interventions The research protocol was previously registered in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews (CRD42018095201) and included defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Prevalence studies on C‐shaped canal anatomy in maxillary molars, mandibular premolars and molars were searched. Study appraisal and synthesis methods The selected studies were submitted to full‐text analysis and critical appraisal by two evaluators using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool. The final group of papers (n = 25) were pooled and forest plots with proportions and odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval performed. Meta‐regression was undertaken to evaluate possible sources of heterogeneity and funnel plot visual analysis to assess publication bias. Results The included studies reported data on 25 445 teeth of 13 142 patients. A significant difference in the average prevalence proportion of C‐shaped configuration was observed between mandibular first (0.3%; 0.1–0.6%) and second (12%; 10.3–13.7%) molars (P < 0.05). No significant difference in the prevalence of C‐shaped configurations was observed comparing males (13.5%; 8.8–18.3%) and females (20.5%; 13.7–27.4%) in mandibular second molars (P > 0.05), although males were associated with significantly lower odds (0.573; 0.511–0.641) (P < 0.05). The pooled proportion of C‐shaped anatomy in mandibular second molars in East Asian countries (39.6%; 36.0–43.1%) was significantly higher compared with other regions. Limitations Because of the limited number of studies, no statistical analysis was performed for maxillary molars and mandibular premolars. Conclusion Meta‐analysis revealed that gender and geographic region may act as a confounding factor for the prevalence of C‐shaped anatomy in mandibular second molars, whilst age did not influence the prevalence of C‐shaped configurations in this tooth group. Knowing these preoperative factors would help to anticipate complex morphologies in clinics.

show abstract

“…A wide range of surgical procedures have been proposed to overcome these dimensional limitations in both the atrophic maxilla and the mandible, including sinus floor augmentation, tilted or zygomatic implants, bone block grafts for onlay or inlay/interpositional grafts, distraction osteogenesis, guided bone regeneration (for alveolar defects, socket grafts, lateral and vertical augmentations) and inferior alveolar nerve transposition [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Despite the high success rate of some of these techniques, such as bone grafting, they are associated with constraints such as the need for an appropriate healing time, which implies increased treatment time and cost, increased postoperative morbidity and risk of complications since they are operator-sensitive techniques where the surgeon's skills and experience are key factors for success [10,17,18]. Moreover, except for the sinus floor augmentation, data on the predictability of those procedures are scarce [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival Rate of 1008 Short Dental Implants with 21 Months of Average Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study

Caramês

Francisco

Fialho

et al. 2020

JCM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective study evaluated the survival rate of short, sandblasted acid-etched surfaced implants with 6 and 8 mm lengths with at least 120 days of follow-up. Data concerning patient, implant and surgery characteristics were retrieved from clinical records. Sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA)-surfaced tissue-level 6 mm (TL6) or 8 mm (TL8) implants or bone-level tapered 8 mm (BLT8) implants were used. Absolute and relative frequency distributions were calculated for qualitative variables and mean values and standard deviations for quantitative variables. A Cox regression model was performed to verify whether type, length and/or width influence the implant survival. The cumulative implant survival rate was assessed by time-to-event analyses (Kaplan–Meier estimator). In all, 513 patients with a mean age of 58.00 ± 12.44 years received 1008 dental implants with a mean follow-up of 21.57 ± 10.77 months. Most implants (78.17%) presented a 4.1 mm diameter, and the most frequent indication was a partially edentulous arch (44.15%). The most frequent locations were the posterior mandible (53.97%) and the posterior maxilla (31.55%). No significant differences were found in survival rates between groups of type, length and width of implant with the cumulative rate being 97.7% ± 0.5%. Within the limitations of this study, the evaluated short implants are a predictable option with high survival rates during the follow-up without statistical differences between the appraised types, lengths and widths.

show abstract

Quality assessment of systematic reviews on vertical bone regeneration

Cited by 34 publications

References 35 publications

Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

Guided bone regeneration in staged vertical and horizontal bone augmentation using platelet-rich fibrin associated with bone grafts: a retrospective clinical study

Prevalence of C‐shaped canal morphology using cone beam computed tomography – a systematic review with meta‐analysis

Survival Rate of 1008 Short Dental Implants with 21 Months of Average Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About