Elnayef Basel, Monje Alberto, Lin Guo-Hao, Gargallo-Albiol Jordi, Chan Hsun-Liang, Wang Hom-Lay, Hernández-Alfaro Federico
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015 May-Jun;30(3):596-606. doi: 10.11607/jomi.4051.
Many techniques have been proposed to overcome the limitations displayed by maxillary atrophy. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the predictability, dimensional changes, and associated factors to successfully perform the alveolar ridge split (ARS) technique of augmentation.
An electronic and manual literature searches was conducted by two independent reviewers in several databases, including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, for articles written in English up to February 2014. A manual search was also performed to ensure a thorough screening process. Based on the PICO (problem, intervention, comparison, outcome) model, the chief question of this study was: Can patients with horizontal ridge deficiency be successfully treated with the ARS technique and implant therapy?
Overall, 17 articles met the inclusion criteria, and a subsequent meta-analysis was performed. A Cohen kappa interagreement rate of 0.82 was reached. The implant survival rate of the included studies was 97.0% (range, 94.4% to 100%) with the full-thickness flap (FTF) approach and 95.7% (range, 86.6% to 100%) with the partial-thickness flap (PTF) approach. The weighted mean (WM) of horizontal bone width gain was calculated for included studies using FTF for the ARS technique. Four studies that had data were included in the meta-analysis. The WM ± standard deviation of bone width gain was 3.19 ± 1.19 mm (range, 2.00 to 4.03 mm). For studies using PTF for ARS, only one study provided mean and standard deviation of horizontal bone width gain (4.13 ± 3.13 mm); hence, meta-analysis could not be performed. Buccal wall fracture represented the most frequent postoperative complication, followed by postoperative ridge resorption.
In selected scenarios, the ARS technique might represent a predictable approach as demonstrated by a high implant survival rate, adequate horizontal bone gain, and minimal intra- and postoperative complications. Further research is needed to determine the influence of the grafting materials inserted and flap tissue biotype, as well as the anatomical characteristics on final bone augmentation outcomes.
已提出多种技术来克服上颌骨萎缩所表现出的局限性。本系统评价的目的是评估成功实施牙槽嵴劈开术(ARS)进行骨增量的可预测性、尺寸变化及相关因素。
两名独立评价者在多个数据库(包括Medline、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库和Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册库)中进行了电子和手工文献检索,以查找截至2014年2月用英文撰写的文章。还进行了手工检索以确保全面的筛选过程。基于PICO(问题、干预措施、对照、结局)模型,本研究的主要问题是:水平牙槽嵴缺损患者能否通过ARS技术和种植治疗成功得到治疗?
总体而言,17篇文章符合纳入标准,并随后进行了荟萃分析。Cohen卡帕一致性率达到0.82。纳入研究中,采用全厚瓣(FTF)方法时种植体存活率为97.0%(范围为94.4%至100%),采用半厚瓣(PTF)方法时为95.7%(范围为86.6%至100%)。对采用FTF进行ARS技术的纳入研究计算了水平骨宽度增加的加权均值(WM)。荟萃分析纳入了四项有数据的研究。骨宽度增加的WM±标准差为3.19±1.19mm(范围为2.00至4.03mm)。对于采用PTF进行ARS的研究,仅有一项研究提供了水平骨宽度增加的均值和标准差(4.13±3.13mm);因此,无法进行荟萃分析。颊侧骨壁骨折是最常见的术后并发症,其次是术后牙槽嵴吸收。
在特定情况下,ARS技术可能是一种可预测的方法,高种植体存活率、足够的水平骨增加以及最小的术中及术后并发症证明了这一点。需要进一步研究以确定所植入的移植材料和瓣组织生物型的影响,以及解剖学特征对最终骨增量结果的影响。