The use of autogenous tooth bone graft is an efficient method of alveolar ridge preservation - meta-analysis and systematic review.
Alveolar bone grafting
Alveolar bone loss
Alveolar preservation
Alveolar process
Socket preservation
Tooth socket
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 04 2023
19 04 2023
Historique:
received:
30
01
2023
accepted:
02
04
2023
medline:
21
4
2023
pubmed:
20
4
2023
entrez:
19
04
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Ridge resorption following tooth extraction may be reduced by alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). Previous randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews have suggested that autogenous tooth bone graft (ATB) can be an effective alternative material for ARP. However, the results are heterogeneous. Therefore, our research aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ATB in ARP. A systematic search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus for studies published from inception to 31 November 2021. We searched searched for randomized, non-randomized controlled trials and case series reporting on ATB use for ARP. The primary outcome was the ridge width difference pre- and post-surgery, measured in millimetres (mm) measured on CBCT (cone beam computed tomography). The secondary outcomes were the histological results. We followed the PRISMA2020 recommendations for reporting our systematic review and meta-analysis. The analysis included eight studies for the primary and six for the secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis revealed a positive ridge preservation effect with a pooled mean difference ridge width change of -0.72 mm. The pooled mean residual graft proportion was 11.61%, and the newly formed bone proportion was 40.23%. The pooled mean of newly formed bone proportion was higher in the group where ATB originated from both the root and crown of the tooth. ATB is an effective particulate graft material in ARP. Complete demineralization of the ATB tends to decrease the proportion of newly formed bone. ATB can be an attractive option for ARP. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021287890).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Ridge resorption following tooth extraction may be reduced by alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). Previous randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews have suggested that autogenous tooth bone graft (ATB) can be an effective alternative material for ARP. However, the results are heterogeneous. Therefore, our research aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ATB in ARP.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus for studies published from inception to 31 November 2021. We searched searched for randomized, non-randomized controlled trials and case series reporting on ATB use for ARP. The primary outcome was the ridge width difference pre- and post-surgery, measured in millimetres (mm) measured on CBCT (cone beam computed tomography). The secondary outcomes were the histological results. We followed the PRISMA2020 recommendations for reporting our systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The analysis included eight studies for the primary and six for the secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis revealed a positive ridge preservation effect with a pooled mean difference ridge width change of -0.72 mm. The pooled mean residual graft proportion was 11.61%, and the newly formed bone proportion was 40.23%. The pooled mean of newly formed bone proportion was higher in the group where ATB originated from both the root and crown of the tooth.
CONCLUSIONS
ATB is an effective particulate graft material in ARP. Complete demineralization of the ATB tends to decrease the proportion of newly formed bone. ATB can be an attractive option for ARP.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021287890).
Identifiants
pubmed: 37076844
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-02930-2
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-02930-2
pmc: PMC10116659
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Meta-Analysis
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
226Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Jan;22(1):1-8
pubmed: 21091538
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001 Jul-Aug;16(4):563-71
pubmed: 11516004
J Periodontol. 2003 Jul;74(7):990-9
pubmed: 12931761
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019 Jan 1;24(1):e53-e60
pubmed: 30573707
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014 Jan;117(1):e39-45
pubmed: 22939321
Clin Case Rep. 2017 Jan 08;5(2):108-118
pubmed: 28174633
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jan;26(1):50-68
pubmed: 27007188
J Dent Res. 2014 Oct;93(10):950-8
pubmed: 24966231
Periodontol 2000. 1999 Feb;19:74-86
pubmed: 10321217
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 26;4:CD010176
pubmed: 33899930
J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Dec;36(12):1048-58
pubmed: 19929956
J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2011 Aug;11(8):7442-5
pubmed: 22103215
Case Rep Dent. 2020 Jun 18;2020:2936878
pubmed: 32612859
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 21;11(1):e0147235
pubmed: 26795024
J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2016 Jul-Aug;20(4):429-434
pubmed: 28298826
J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Feb;32(2):212-8
pubmed: 15691354
Implant Dent. 2019 Apr;28(2):187-209
pubmed: 30648979
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 May;32(5):539-548
pubmed: 33565656
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Jul;28(7):809-815
pubmed: 27279547
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Aug;28(8):982-1004
pubmed: 27458031
Br Dent J. 2022 Sep;233(6):469-474
pubmed: 36151171
Dent Traumatol. 2014 Oct;30(5):380-384
pubmed: 24597718
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Feb;21(1):4-10
pubmed: 30589195
Arch Oral Biol. 1967 Aug;12(8):999-1008
pubmed: 4226721
BMC Oral Health. 2021 Feb 11;21(1):63
pubmed: 33573644
J Periodontol. 2010 Sep;81(9):1264-72
pubmed: 20476887
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Apr;39(2):90-3
pubmed: 24471024
J Periodontol. 2012 Mar;83(3):329-36
pubmed: 21749166
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 28;(5):CD010176
pubmed: 26020735
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010 Apr;109(4):496-503
pubmed: 20060336
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Jan;52(1):132-141
pubmed: 35618639
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Aug;32(8):905-915
pubmed: 33982320
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Aug;39(4):156-60
pubmed: 24471036
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1986 Apr;15(2):160-9
pubmed: 3083019
J Calif Dent Assoc. 2005 Nov;33(11):853-63
pubmed: 16463907
Medwave. 2021 Mar 17;21(2):e8109
pubmed: 33830974
Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2007 Mar;19(2):99-104; quiz 106
pubmed: 17491484
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2021 Nov;49(11):1064-1071
pubmed: 34176715
J Prosthet Dent. 1976 Aug;36(2):150-8
pubmed: 789863
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Jan;20(1):1-6
pubmed: 19126101
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003 Aug;23(4):313-23
pubmed: 12956475
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2016 Oct;104(10):2616-27
pubmed: 27256548
J Clin Periodontol. 2003 Aug;30(8):746-51
pubmed: 12887344
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020 Oct-Dec;10(4):535-541
pubmed: 32904228
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2018 Jan 1;23(1):e112-e119
pubmed: 29274156