Suppr超能文献

贝叶斯网状Meta 分析在根覆盖手术中的应用:疗效排序和最佳治疗方法的识别。

Bayesian network meta-analysis of root coverage procedures: ranking efficacy and identification of best treatment.

机构信息

Department of Public Health, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Apr;40(4):372-86. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12028. Epub 2013 Jan 24.

Abstract

AIMS

The aim of this work was to conduct a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NM) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish a ranking in efficacy and the best technique for coronally advanced flap (CAF)-based root coverage procedures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search on PubMed, Cochrane libraries, EMBASE, and hand-searched journals until June 2012 was conducted to identify RCTs on treatments of Miller Class I and II gingival recessions with at least 6 months of follow-up. The treatment outcomes were recession reduction (RecRed), clinical attachment gain (CALgain), keratinized tissue gain (KTgain), and complete root coverage (CRC).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, 20 of which were classified as at high risk of bias. The CAF+connective tissue graft (CTG) combination ranked highest in effectiveness for RecRed (Probability of being the best = 40%) and CALgain (Pr = 33%); CAF+enamel matrix derivative (EMD) was slightly better for CRC; CAF+Collagen Matrix (CM) appeared effective for KTgain (Pr = 69%). Network inconsistency was low for all outcomes excluding CALgain.

CONCLUSION

CAF+CTG might be considered the gold standard in root coverage procedures. The low amount of inconsistency gives support to the reliability of the present findings.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在通过贝叶斯网状 Meta 分析(NM)对随机对照试验(RCT)进行评估,以确定根向复位瓣(CAF)为主的根覆盖术中疗效最佳的技术和方法。

材料和方法

对 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、EMBASE 及手工检索的期刊进行了截至 2012 年 6 月的文献检索,以确定对 Miller Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类牙龈退缩(至少随访 6 个月)进行治疗的 RCT 研究。治疗结果为龈退缩减少(RecRed)、临床附着增加(CALgain)、角化组织增加(KTgain)和完全根覆盖(CRC)。

结果

29 项研究符合纳入标准,其中 20 项被归类为高偏倚风险。CAF+结缔组织移植物(CTG)联合治疗在 RecRed(最佳可能性为 40%)和 CALgain(Pr=33%)方面效果最佳;CAF+脱细胞真皮基质(EMD)在 CRC 方面略好;CAF+胶原基质(CM)在 KTgain 方面效果显著(Pr=69%)。除 CALgain 外,所有结果的网络不一致性均较低。

结论

CAF+CTG 可能被认为是根覆盖术的金标准。不一致性低为目前研究结果的可靠性提供了支持。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验