Section of Graduate Periodontology, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
Section of Graduate Periodontology, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal Diseases) Research Group, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
J Dent Res. 2015 Sep;94(9 Suppl):128S-42S. doi: 10.1177/0022034515594780. Epub 2015 Jul 27.
Lateral ridge augmentation procedures are aimed to reconstruct deficient alveolar ridges or to build up peri-implant dehiscence and fenestrations. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of these interventions by analyzing data from 40 clinical studies evaluating bone augmentation through either the staged or the simultaneous approach. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guideline for systematic reviews was used. The primary outcomes were the changes at reentry, in the ridge width, and in the vertical and horizontal dimensions of the peri-implant defect, measured in millimeters, in the staged and simultaneous approaches, respectively. The results of the meta-analysis showed, for the simultaneous approach, a statistically significant defect height reduction when all treatments were analyzed together (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -4.28 mm; 95% confidence interval: [CI] -4.88, -3.69; P < 0.01). The intervention combining bone replacement grafts with barrier membranes was associated with superior outcomes The most frequently used intervention was the combination of xenograft and bioabsorbable membrane. Similarly, for the staged approach, there was a statistically significant horizontal gain when all treatment groups were combined (WMD = 3.90 mm; 95% CI: 3.52, 4.28; P < 0.001). The most frequently used intervention was the use of autogenous bone blocks. Both treatment strategies led to high survival and success rates (>95%) for the implants placed on the regenerated sites. Nonexposed sites gained significantly more in the simultaneous and staged approaches (WMD = 1.1 and 3.1 mm).
侧向牙槽嵴增高术旨在重建缺损的牙槽嵴或修复种植体周围的骨缺损和开窗。本系统评价的目的是通过分析 40 项评估通过分期或同期方法进行骨增量的临床研究数据来评估这些干预措施的疗效。本系统评价遵循 PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目)指南。主要结局指标是分期和同期方法中,分别以毫米为单位,在再进入时、牙槽嵴宽度以及种植体周围缺损的垂直和水平维度上的变化。荟萃分析结果表明,对于同期方法,当所有治疗方法一起分析时,缺陷高度显著降低(加权均数差[WMD] = -4.28 毫米;95%置信区间:[CI] -4.88,-3.69;P < 0.01)。将骨替代移植物与屏障膜结合的干预措施与更好的结果相关联。最常使用的干预措施是异种移植物和生物可吸收膜的联合使用。同样,对于分期方法,当所有治疗组结合在一起时,水平方向有显著的增加(WMD = 3.90 毫米;95%CI:3.52,4.28;P < 0.001)。最常使用的干预措施是使用自体骨块。这两种治疗策略都导致了在再生部位放置的种植体的高存活率和成功率(>95%)。在同期和分期方法中,未暴露的部位分别增加了 1.1 和 3.1 毫米。