-
Clinical Oral Implants Research Aug 2017Two focused questions were addressed within this systematic review. Q1) What is the effect of alveolar ridge preservation on linear and volumetric alveolar site... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Two focused questions were addressed within this systematic review. Q1) What is the effect of alveolar ridge preservation on linear and volumetric alveolar site dimensions, keratinised measurements, histological characteristics and patient-based outcomes when compared to unassisted socket healing. Q2) What is the size effect of these outcomes in three different types of intervention (guided bone regeneration, socket grafting and socket seal).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register LILACS, Web of Science) and hand-search was conducted up to June 2015. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT); with unassisted socket healing as controls: were eligible in the analysis for Q1. RCTs, CCTs and large prospective case series with or without an unassisted socket healing as control group were eligible in the analysis for Q2.
RESULTS
Nine papers (8 RCTs and 1 CCTs) were included in the analysis for Q1 and 37 papers (29 RCTs, 7 CCTs and 1 case series) for Q2. The risk for bias was unclear or high in most of the studies. Q1: the standardised mean difference (SMD) in vertical mid-buccal bone height between ARP and a non-treated site was 0.739 mm (95% CI: 0.332 to 1.147). The SMD when proximal vertical bone height and horizontal bone width was compared was 0.796mm (95% CI: -1.228 to 0.364) and 1.198 mm (95% CI: -0.0374 to 2.433). Examination of ARP sites revealed significant variation in vital and trabecular bone percentages and keratinised tissue width and thickness. Adverse events were routinely reported, with three papers reporting a high level of complications in the test and control groups and two papers reporting greater risks associated with ARP. No studies reported on variables associated with the patient experience in either the test or the control group. Q2: A pooled effect reduction (PER) in mid-buccal alveolar ridge height of -0.467 mm (95% CI: -0.866 to -0.069) was recorded for GBR procedures and -0.157 mm (95% CI: -0.554 to 0.239) for socket grafting. A proximal vertical bone height reduction of -0.356 mm (95% CI: -0.490 to -0.222) was recorded for GBR, with a horizontal dimensional reduction of -1.45 mm (95% CI: -1.892 to -1.008) measured following GBR and -1.613 mm (95% CI: -1.989 to -1.238) for socket grafting procedures. Five papers reported on histological findings after ARP. Two papers indicated an increase in the width of the keratinised tissue following GBR, with two papers reporting a reduction in the thickness of the keratinised tissue following GBR. Histological examination revealed extensive variations in the treatment protocols and biomaterials materials used to evaluate extraction socket healing. GBR studies reported a variation in total bone formation of 47.9 ± 9.1% to 24.67 ± 15.92%. Post-operative complications were reported by 29 papers, with the most common findings soft tissue inflammation and infection.
CONCLUSION
ARP results in a significant reduction in the vertical bone dimensional change following tooth extraction when compared to unassisted socket healing. The reduction in horizontal alveolar bone dimensional change was found to be variable. No evidence was identified to clearly indicate the superior impact of a type of ARP intervention (GBR, socket filler and socket seal) on bone dimensional preservation, bone formation, keratinised tissue dimensions and patient complications.
Topics: Alveolar Process; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation; Gingiva; Humans; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27458031
DOI: 10.1111/clr.12911 -
Journal of the American Dental... Aug 2023Corticosteroids are used to manage pain after surgical tooth extractions. The authors assessed the effect of corticosteroids on acute postoperative pain in patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Corticosteroids are used to manage pain after surgical tooth extractions. The authors assessed the effect of corticosteroids on acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing surgical tooth extractions of mandibular third molars.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. The authors searched the Epistemonikos database, including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the US clinical trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) from inception until April 2023. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, then full texts of trials were identified as potentially eligible. After duplicate data abstraction, the authors conducted random-effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using Version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and certainty of the evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
Forty randomized controlled trials proved eligible. The evidence suggested that corticosteroids compared with a placebo provided a trivial reduction in pain intensity measured 6 hours (mean difference, 8.79 points lower; 95% CI, 14.8 to 2.77 points lower; low certainty) and 24 hours after surgical tooth extraction (mean difference, 8.89 points lower; 95% CI, 10.71 to 7.06 points lower; very low certainty). The authors found no important difference between corticosteroids and a placebo with regard to incidence of postoperative infection (risk difference, 0%; 95% CI, -1% to 1%; low certainty) and alveolar osteitis (risk difference, 0%; 95% CI, -3% to 4%; very low certainty).
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Low and very low certainty evidence suggests that there is a trivial difference regarding postoperative pain intensity and adverse effects of corticosteroids administered orally, submucosally, or intramuscularly compared with a placebo in patients undergoing third-molar extractions.
Topics: Humans; Molar, Third; Acute Pain; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Dry Socket; Postoperative Complications; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37500235
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2023.04.018 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2022The primary objective of the present systematic review is to test the hypothesis - the revision of the complexity of the extraction sockets morphology classifications... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the present systematic review is to test the hypothesis - the revision of the complexity of the extraction sockets morphology classifications will reveal the most important parameters for implant aesthetic and functional success in case of immediate dental implant placement in aesthetic zone. The secondary objective is to revise the most important parameters of aesthetic indexes created for implant-supported restoration in aesthetic zone.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
MEDLINE (PubMed) and Cochrane Library search in combination with hand-search of relevant journals was conducted including human studies published in English between 1 January 2005 and 1 February 2022. After evaluation of the titles and abstracts in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, risk-of-bias assessment was evaluated and data was extracted from the full papers.
RESULTS
Electronic and hand searching resulted in 477 entries. Five systematic reviews, research syntheses and 7 prospective studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final data synthesis. Selected articles reported the different classifications complexity of the extraction sockets morphology and aesthetic indexes for implant supported restoration in aesthetic zone.
CONCLUSIONS
The most important parameters for implant aesthetics and functional success, incorporated in classifications of extraction sockets are facial soft tissue level and quality, gingival biotype, keratinized gingival, mesial and distal papillae appearance, buccal bone level and thickness, labial and buccal bone plates damage and bone lesions. The most important aesthetic indexes parameters are soft tissue contour position, including colour and texture, interdental papilla, mesial and distal interproximal bone height, gingival biotype.
PubMed: 35949544
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2022.13201 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Jul 2016Prophylactic use of amoxicillin and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, although controversial, is common in routine clinical practice in third molar surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prophylactic use of amoxicillin and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, although controversial, is common in routine clinical practice in third molar surgery.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Our objective was to assess the efficacy of prophylactic amoxicillin with or without clavulanic acid in reducing the incidence of dry socket and/or infection after third molar extraction. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis consulting electronic databases and references in retrieved articles. We included double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials published up to June 2015 investigating the efficacy of amoxicillin with or without clavulanic acid on the incidence of the aforementioned conditions after third molar extraction. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated with a generic inverse-variance approach and a random effect model using Stata/IC 13 and Review Manager Version 5.2. Stratified analysis was performed by antibiotic type.
RESULTS
We included 10 papers in the qualitative review and in the quantitative synthesis (1997 extractions: 1072 in experimental groups and 925 in controls, with 27 and 74 events of dry socket and/or infection, respectively). The overall RR was 0.350 (p<0.001; 95% CI 0.214 to 0.574). We found no evidence of heterogeneity (I2=0%, p=0.470). The number needed to treat was 18 (95% CI 13 to 29). Five studies reported adverse reactions (RR=1.188, 95% CI 0.658 to 2.146, p =0.567). The RRs were 0.563 for amoxicillin (95% CI 0.295 to 1.08, p=0.082) and 0.215 for amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (95% CI 0.117 to 0.395, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic use of amoxicillin does not significantly reduce the risk of infection and/or dry socket after third molar extraction. With amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, the risk decreases significantly. Nevertheless, considering the number needed to treat, low prevalence of infection, potential adverse reactions to antibiotics and lack of serious complications in placebo groups, the routine prescription of amoxicillin with or without clavulanic acid is not justified.
Topics: Amoxicillin; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Dry Socket; Humans; Infection Control; Molar, Third; Tooth Exfoliation
PubMed: 26946211
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.21139 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Jan 2015The aim of this article was to systematically review histological and histomorphometrical data from literature that provide information regarding the effect of alveolar... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
The aim of this article was to systematically review histological and histomorphometrical data from literature that provide information regarding the effect of alveolar ridge preservation procedures on healing after tooth extraction in humans.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The MEDLINE-PubMed and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched up to September 2012; 38 papers were selected from 646 founded. A meta-analysis was performed regarding the variations in the mean percentage of Bone, Connective Tissue and Residual Graft Material between three different types of Procedures.
RESULTS
The highest value regarding bone percentages is produced at 3 months by Procedures with Allografts (54.4%), while the lowest is obtained, at 5 months, by those using Xenografts (23.6%). Referring to connective tissue, the highest and lowest values are shown at 7 months, with Allografts (67%) and Alloplasts (27.1%), respectively. Regarding residual graft material, the lowest rates are displayed by Procedures with Allografts (12.4-21.11%), while those using Xenografts and Alloplasts showed the best results at 7 months (37.14 and 37.23%). No statistical difference was found.
CONCLUSIONS
With the limitations due to the features of the selected papers, no major histological and histomorphometrical differences arose among different procedures or when compared to spontaneous healing. Thus, it might be argued that in preserved sites it is unnecessary to wait over 3 to 4 months prior to implant insertion.
Topics: Alveolar Bone Loss; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation; Bone Transplantation; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Humans; Tooth Extraction; Wound Healing
PubMed: 27007188
DOI: 10.1111/clr.12288 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2019To compare the success rates, tissue preservation, and esthetics of implants placed in fresh and preserved sockets and to evaluate the factors influencing the outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To compare the success rates, tissue preservation, and esthetics of implants placed in fresh and preserved sockets and to evaluate the factors influencing the outcomes.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched electronically, and a manual search was conducted as well. Studies that compared the implant success rate, tissue preservation, and patient-related outcomes such as complications and esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placement (IIP) and alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) were included. A subgroup analysis according to the follow-up period, socket conditions, and regenerative strategies was performed to investigate how these factors influence the prognosis.
RESULTS
A total of 12 studies with 588 implants, where 298 are implants after ARP and the remaining 290 are after IIP. The IIP was performed in 58.4% of 250 implants inserted in the sockets with an intact buccal wall, whereas the percentage declined to 41.9% when the buccal wall was defective. The implant success rate was similar between ARP and IIP for an intact buccal wall but different for a defective buccal wall (ARP 98.6% vs IIP 89.6%). Moreover, hard-tissue preservation and the Pink Esthetic Score (PES) of the ARP group were significantly better than those of the IIP group in the molar region (P < .05). Also short-term complications showed no significant differences in the ARP group (P = .06). In the anterior region, there appeared to be no significant difference in hard- and soft-tissue preservation PES and patient-related outcomes between the 2 protocols.
CONCLUSION
An alveolar bone defect might reduce the success rate of IIP. Further studies on the tissue preservation and esthetics of implants placed by IIP and ARP are still needed.
Topics: China; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Tissue Preservation; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31843184
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2019.05.015 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Aug 2023To investigate the histomorphometric changes occurring in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) based on the use of different plasma concentrates (PCs) in randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the histomorphometric changes occurring in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) based on the use of different plasma concentrates (PCs) in randomized clinical trials (RCT). There is controversy whether the placement of PCs in ARP is effective in the formation of new bone.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database to answer the PICO question: In patients undergoing tooth extraction followed by ARP, do PCs alone in the post-extraction socket in comparison with spontaneous healing improve new vital bone formation percentage in histomorphometric analysis after more than 10 weeks? The risk of bias was assessed and a meta-analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
Of 3809 results, 8 studies were considered suitable for inclusion. A total of 255 teeth were extracted in 250 patients. Regarding the PCs used, ARP was performed with platelet- and leukocyte-rich fibrin (L-PRF) in 120 sockets, and with pure platelet-rich plasma (P-PRP) in 31 sockets and 104 sockets were controlled. PCs improved new bone formation in ARP with respect to the spontaneous healing group (SMD = 1.77, 95%C.I. = 1.47-2.06, p-value < 000.1). There were no differences between the different PCs (L-PRF and P-PRP).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta-analysis support the efficacy of the use of PCs in new bone formation in ARP. With respect to the different types of PCs studied, no differences were observed.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
When planning implant surgery after tooth extraction, treatment with PCs should be considered for ARP. Any PC increases new bone formation compared to spontaneous healing.
Topics: Humans; Tooth Socket; Alveolar Process; Osteogenesis; Tooth; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Tooth Extraction; Fibrin; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation
PubMed: 37439800
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05126-8 -
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica Jul 2018This review aimed to investigate the feasibility of immediate implant placement in infected extraction sockets. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to investigate the feasibility of immediate implant placement in infected extraction sockets.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We performed electronic and manual searches up to March 2017 to obtain data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Using a fixed-effects model to assess the difference in survival rate (primary outcome), we evaluated the risk difference for immediate implant placement in infected and non-infected sites. We estimated the weighted mean differences (WMDs) of the change in marginal bone loss (MBL), probing depth (PD), modified bleeding index (mBI), marginal gingival level (MGL) and width of keratinized gingiva (WKG) at baseline and latest follow-up.
RESULTS
In total, five studies (0 RCT, five CCTs) were included in the systematic review and three studies were included in the meta-analysis. The risk difference for immediate implant placement in an infected extraction socket compared with that in a non-infected socket was -0.02. WMDs for MBL, PD, mBI, MGL and WKG between the two groups were 0.32, 0.12, 0.07, -0.06, 0.20 and 0.51, respectively. No statistical differences were observed between the two groups, except for the change in WKG.
CONCLUSIONS
Implants can be placed in infected extraction sockets after thorough socket debridement. For aesthetics, WKG should be considered when performing immediate implant placement in infected sites.
Topics: Adult; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29611763
DOI: 10.1080/00016357.2018.1453084 -
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Jun 2024The aim of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of pre-alveolar bonegraft (ABG) orthodontics with no orthodontic treatment for patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effectiveness of pre-alveolar bone graft orthodontics for patients with non-syndromic complete unilateral cleft lip, alveolus and palate: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
UNLABELLED
The aim of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of pre-alveolar bonegraft (ABG) orthodontics with no orthodontic treatment for patients with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip, alveolus and palate. All relevant studies from 1946 to October 30, 2022, were identified using several sources including The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EPUB ahead of publications and non-indexed citations. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Controlled Clinical Trials (CCT) were included.
POPULATION
Non-syndromic complete unilateral cleft lip, alveolus and palate patients who have had ABG surgery.
INTERVENTION
Orthodontics prior to ABG. Comparison: No orthodontic treatment prior to ABG.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
Successful eruption of permanent canines. All articles were screened for the title, abstract and full text independently and in duplicate by 2 reviewers. The quality assessment of RCT was performed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool and the CCT was assessed using ROBINS-I tool. Of the 904 studies retrieved in the search, one RCT and one CCT were included. Both studies were judged as high risk of bias. The results from one study showed a statistically significant increase in bone volume and decreased bone defect post-ABG in the orthodontic treatment group. However, there was no difference with respect to other variables. Both included studies were of low quality. There is not enough evidence to recommend orthodontic treatment pre-ABG for patients with complete unilateral cleft lip, alveolus and palate. Future high-quality studies are required to inform patients and clinicians about the effectiveness of pre-graft orthodontic treatment.
Topics: Humans; Cleft Palate; Cleft Lip; Alveolar Bone Grafting; Orthodontics, Corrective; Treatment Outcome; Bone Transplantation
PubMed: 38108550
DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12744 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2019To evaluate the reported literature on the use of stem cells or growth factors for post extraction treatment of the alveolar bone. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the reported literature on the use of stem cells or growth factors for post extraction treatment of the alveolar bone.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A NCBI PubMed and PubMed Central databases search was conducted between September 2010 and August 2018, to identify animal or clinical studies reporting the clinical, radiographical and/or histological outcomes of socket preservation techniques after applying mesenchymal stem cells or growth factors. Only studies published in English language in the last 10 years were included in the study.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were identified fulfilling the inclusion criteria. They evaluate a total of 386 post extraction sockets. The main tested materials identified in the current review were bone morphogenetic protein-2 - 3 studies and mesenchymal stem cells - 3 studies. Other comparators were bone morphogenetic protein-9, platelet-derived growth factor-BB homodimers and bone marrow. Overall evaluation indicate positive results for all test groups showing differences in final socket width between 0.64 and 1.28 mm favouring the test groups. Histologically, no particular differences are detected between test and control groups. Most of the studies present low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
In general, the use of mesenchymal stem cells or bioactive osteogenic molecules favours bone regeneration after tooth extraction, as evaluated clinically, radiographically and histologically. However, specific differences that support particular recommendations are still unclear in light of the current published evidence. Future studies should include the standardization of the mesenchymal stem cells selection and purification as well as dosage and delivery methods of bioactive molecules.
PubMed: 31620269
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2019.10307