Intra-marrow penetrations and root coverage outcomes: a systematic review.
Bone marrow/*surgery
Gingival recession
Osteotomy
Surgical flaps
Systematic review
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 05 2023
03 05 2023
Historique:
received:
26
01
2023
accepted:
12
04
2023
medline:
5
5
2023
pubmed:
4
5
2023
entrez:
3
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Intra-marrow penetrations (IMPs) have been performed during guided tissue regeneration (GTR) procedures with reported clinical benefits. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the use and effect of IMPs during root coverage procedures. A broad search for human and animal studies was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials and Web of Science, following a registered review protocol (PROSPERO). All prospective study designs, case series and case reports on gingival recession treatment (follow-up ≥ 6 months) that employed IMPs were included. Root coverage, complete root coverage prevalence, and adverse effects were recorded, and risk of bias was assessed. Of 16,181 screened titles, 5 articles (all of them human studies) met inclusion criteria. All studies (including two randomized clinical trials) treated Miller class I and II recession defects, using coronally advanced flap with IMPs alone or in conjunction with GTR protocols. Therefore, all treated defects received IMPs and no studies compared protocols with and without IMPs. Outcomes were indirectly compared with existing root coverage literature. Mean root coverage was 2.7 mm and 68.5% at 6.8 months (median: 6 months, range 6-15 months) for sites treated with IMPs. IMPs are rarely used during root coverage procedures, have not been associated with intra-surgical or wound healing adverse effects and have not been investigated as independent factor. Future clinical studies are needed to directly compare treatment protocols with and without IMPs and investigate the potential benefits of IMPs for root coverage.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Intra-marrow penetrations (IMPs) have been performed during guided tissue regeneration (GTR) procedures with reported clinical benefits. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the use and effect of IMPs during root coverage procedures.
METHOD
A broad search for human and animal studies was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials and Web of Science, following a registered review protocol (PROSPERO). All prospective study designs, case series and case reports on gingival recession treatment (follow-up ≥ 6 months) that employed IMPs were included. Root coverage, complete root coverage prevalence, and adverse effects were recorded, and risk of bias was assessed.
RESULTS
Of 16,181 screened titles, 5 articles (all of them human studies) met inclusion criteria. All studies (including two randomized clinical trials) treated Miller class I and II recession defects, using coronally advanced flap with IMPs alone or in conjunction with GTR protocols. Therefore, all treated defects received IMPs and no studies compared protocols with and without IMPs. Outcomes were indirectly compared with existing root coverage literature. Mean root coverage was 2.7 mm and 68.5% at 6.8 months (median: 6 months, range 6-15 months) for sites treated with IMPs.
CONCLUSION
IMPs are rarely used during root coverage procedures, have not been associated with intra-surgical or wound healing adverse effects and have not been investigated as independent factor. Future clinical studies are needed to directly compare treatment protocols with and without IMPs and investigate the potential benefits of IMPs for root coverage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37138270
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-02964-6
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-02964-6
pmc: PMC10157995
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
256Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Periodontol. 2000 Feb;71(2):188-201
pubmed: 10711609
Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997 Apr;8(2):75-81
pubmed: 9758957
Contemp Clin Dent. 2016 Apr-Jun;7(2):258-61
pubmed: 27307681
J Periodontol. 1993 May;64(5):387-91
pubmed: 8515369
J Periodontol. 2016 Feb;87(2):148-55
pubmed: 26447751
J Periodontol. 1998 Nov;69(11):1271-7
pubmed: 9848537
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):e1-34
pubmed: 19631507
J Int Acad Periodontol. 2019 Oct 1;21(4):159-167
pubmed: 31694986
J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29 Suppl 3:178-94; discussion 195-6
pubmed: 12787218
J Periodontol. 2004 Feb;75(2):210-20
pubmed: 15068108
J Periodontol. 2016 Jul;87(7):796-808
pubmed: 26878749
Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997 Jun;8(3):244-8
pubmed: 9586469
J Periodontol. 2015 Feb;86(2 Suppl):S8-51
pubmed: 25644302
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1985;5(2):8-13
pubmed: 3858267
J Periodontol. 2019 Dec;90(12):1399-1422
pubmed: 31361330
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Jul;49(7):945-951
pubmed: 31718859
J Periodontol. 2020 Apr;91(4):484-492
pubmed: 31512742
J Periodontol. 2004 Feb;75(2):196-209
pubmed: 15068107
J Periodontol. 2011 Nov;82(11):1524-9
pubmed: 21342005
J Periodontol. 2000 Jun;71(6):989-98
pubmed: 10914803
J Periodontol. 2000 Feb;71(2):299-307
pubmed: 10711621
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018 Sep/Oct;38(5):683-690
pubmed: 30113607
J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Sep;36(9):791-8
pubmed: 19594663
Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Dec;24(12):4583-4589
pubmed: 32440936
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002 Apr;22(2):119-27
pubmed: 12019707
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Apr;41 Suppl 15:S44-62
pubmed: 24641000
J Periodontol. 1999 Jan;70(1):30-43
pubmed: 10052768
J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Jul;38(7):661-6
pubmed: 21507033
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Nov;(248):294-309
pubmed: 2680203
J Periodontol. 1999 Sep;70(9):1064-76
pubmed: 10505810
J Periodontol. 2018 Jun;89 Suppl 1:S204-S213
pubmed: 29926948
J Clin Periodontol. 2008 Sep;35(8 Suppl):136-62
pubmed: 18724847
J Periodontal Res. 2016 Apr;51(2):175-85
pubmed: 26095265
J Periodontal Res. 2007 Oct;42(5):474-85
pubmed: 17760826
J Clin Periodontol. 2020 Oct;47(10):1180-1190
pubmed: 32748539
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Apr;41 Suppl 15:S108-22
pubmed: 24640996
J Periodontol. 2009 Feb;80(2):175-89
pubmed: 19186957
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1996 Aug;16(4):356-65
pubmed: 9242103
J Periodontol. 2006 Jan;77(1):81-7
pubmed: 16579707
J Periodontol. 1999 Dec;70(12):1501-10
pubmed: 10632526
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Apr;41 Suppl 15:S63-76
pubmed: 24641002
J Periodontol. 2009 Apr;80(4):577-85
pubmed: 19335077
J Clin Periodontol. 1984 Oct;11(9):583-9
pubmed: 6593330
J Periodontol. 1992 Jun;63(6):554-60
pubmed: 1625156
J Periodontol. 2010 Jun;81(6):827-36
pubmed: 20450359
J Craniofac Surg. 2022 Oct 1;33(7):2181-2187
pubmed: 36201705
J Periodontol. 2009 Mar;80(3):405-10
pubmed: 19254124
Ann Periodontol. 2003 Dec;8(1):303-20
pubmed: 14971258
J Periodontol. 2014 Jan;85(1):34-42
pubmed: 23537123
J Clin Periodontol. 1994 Jan;21(1):57-63
pubmed: 8126246
J Periodontol. 2011 Dec;82(12):1713-24
pubmed: 21542735
J Clin Periodontol. 2005 May;32(5):518-29
pubmed: 15842269
J Periodontol. 1999 Sep;70(9):1118-24
pubmed: 10505815
J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Jul;40(7):707-12
pubmed: 23668251
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
J Periodontol. 2005 May;76(5):713-22
pubmed: 15898931
J Periodontol. 2002 Dec;73(12):1419-26
pubmed: 12546091
J Periodontol. 2003 Oct;74(10):1520-33
pubmed: 14653400
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005 Dec;25(6):561-9
pubmed: 16353531
J Periodontol. 2008 Apr;79(4):647-53
pubmed: 18380557
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002 Dec;22(6):559-65
pubmed: 12516827
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009 Oct;108(4):529-36
pubmed: 19716719