» Articles » PMID: 35316573

Effect of Lateral Bone Augmentation Procedures in Correcting Peri-implant Bone Dehiscence and Fenestration Defects: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2022 Mar 22
PMID 35316573
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the present systematic review was to evaluate the effect of different lateral bone augmentation (LBA) procedures on the complete correction of a peri-implant bone dehiscence (BD) or fenestration (BF) from implant placement to implant surgical uncovering.

Methods: Electronic (Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane databases) and hand literature searches were performed for studies including at least one treatment arm where any LBA had been applied to correct a BD/BF at implant placement (T0). Studies where BD/BF was left untreated were also retrieved as negative control. Data from 24 selected articles were used to perform a network meta-analysis. Based on the proportion of nonresolved BD/BF at implant surgical uncovering (T1), a hierarchy of LBA procedures, and was determined. Spontaneous healing (i.e., exposed implant surface covered by a full-thickness flap; SELF) was also included in the hierarchy. Resorbable membrane + bone graft (RM + BG) was used as reference group. An analysis on the effect of nonhuman (NHBS) vs human (HBS) derived bone substitutes was also performed. NHBS was used as the reference group.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found among treatments for the proportion of nonresolved BD/BF. SELF performed substantially worse compared to RM + BG (OR: 5.78 × 10, CI: 4.83 × 10 - 1.3 × 10 ). Treatment based on a combination of a graft material and membrane/periosteum appeared to perform slightly better than treatments using graft material or membrane alone. NHBS appeared to perform better than HBS. SELF had the worst effect among all treatments for both BD/BF height reduction (BDH) and BD/BF width reduction (BDW). Nonresorbable membrane (NRM) and patient's own periosteum (PERI) + BG showed greater increases in buccal bone thickness than RM + BG.

Conclusion: Reconstructive treatment (including use of graft alone, membrane alone, or combinations of grafts and either membrane or patient's own periosteum) of a BD/BF at implant placement favorably and significantly impacts on the probability to obtain complete correction of the BD/BF at implant uncovering when compared to full-thickness flap repositioning on the BD/BF. When using a bone substitute, a nonhuman derived one may be suggested.

Citing Articles

Guided bone regeneration at dehiscence comparing synthetic bone substitute versus bovine bone mineral: A multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial.

Cha J, Jung U, Montero-Solis E, Sanz-Sanchez I, Sanz-Alonso M Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024; 26(6):1233-1244.

PMID: 39228122 PMC: 11660529. DOI: 10.1111/cid.13386.


3D-printed bredigite scaffolds with ordered arrangement structures promote bone regeneration by inducing macrophage polarization in onlay grafts.

Xuan Y, Guo Y, Li L, Yuzhang , Zhang C, RuiJin J Nanobiotechnology. 2024; 22(1):102.

PMID: 38468312 PMC: 10926610. DOI: 10.1186/s12951-024-02362-2.


[Role of collagen membrane in modified guided bone regeneration surgery using buccal punch flap approach: A retrospective and radiographical cohort study].

Duan D, Wang H, Wang E Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2023; 55(6):1097-1104.

PMID: 38101795 PMC: 10723998.


Effect of lateral bone augmentation procedures in correcting peri-implant bone dehiscence and fenestration defects: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Severi M, Simonelli A, Farina R, Tu Y, Lan C, Shih M Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022; 24(2):251-264.

PMID: 35316573 PMC: 9315147. DOI: 10.1111/cid.13078.

References
1.
Dahlin C, Lekholm U, Linde A . Membrane-induced bone augmentation at titanium implants. A report on ten fixtures followed from 1 to 3 years after loading. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1991; 11(4):273-81. View

2.
Mayfield L, Nobreus N, Attstrom R, Linde A . Guided bone regeneration in dental implant treatment using a bioabsorbable membrane. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997; 8(1):10-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.1997.tb00002.x. View

3.
Jung R, Herzog M, Wolleb K, Ramel C, Thoma D, Hammerle C . A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing small buccal dehiscence defects around dental implants treated with guided bone regeneration or left for spontaneous healing. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 28(3):348-354. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12806. View

4.
Grunder U, Gracis S, Capelli M . Influence of the 3-D bone-to-implant relationship on esthetics. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005; 25(2):113-9. View

5.
Trombelli L, Pramstraller M, Severi M, Simonelli A, Farina R . Peri-implant tissue conditions at implants treated with Sub-periosteal Peri-implant Augmented Layer technique: A retrospective case series. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020; 31(10):992-1001. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13646. View