Dataset Information

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With or Without Barrier Membrane Coverage of the Lateral Window: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:Test the hypothesis of no difference in implant treatment outcomes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with or without barrier membrane coverage of the lateral window. Material and Methods:A MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane library search in combination with a hand-search of relevant journals was conducted. Human studies published in English until the 5th of July, 2019 were included. Randomised controlled trials and controlled trials with an observation period of minimum six months were included. Primary outcomes included survival of suprastructures and implants. Secondary outcomes included implant stability quotient, peri-implant marginal bone loss, bone regeneration, patient-reported outcome measures, biologic and mechanical complications. Results:The electronic search and hand-searching resulted in 1068 entries. Six randomised controlled trials characterised by low to high risk of bias and one controlled trial with high risk of bias fulfilled the inclusion criteria. High implant survival rate was reported with both treatment modalities. Meta-analyses disclosed a mean difference of newly formed bone of 6.4% (confidence interval = 0 to 12.9) and non-mineralised tissue of -1.1% (confidence interval = -2.7 to 0.5), indicating more newly formed bone and diminished non-mineralised with barrier membrane coverage. Conclusions:There seem to be no statistically significant differences in implant treatment outcomes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with or without barrier membrane coverage of the lateral window. However, barrier membrane coverage increases percentage of newly formed bone and diminishes proliferation of non-mineralised tissue. Thus, barrier membrane coverage seems to be beneficial and also preventing displacement of the grafting material.

SUBMITTER: Starch-Jensen T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7012617 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With or Without Barrier Membrane Coverage of the Lateral Window: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Starch-Jensen Thomas T Deluiz Daniel D Duch Kirsten K Tinoco Eduardo Muniz Barretto EMB

Journal of oral & maxillofacial research 20191001 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>Test the hypothesis of no difference in implant treatment outcomes after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with or without barrier membrane coverage of the lateral window.<h4>Material and methods</h4>A MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane library search in combination with a hand-search of relevant journals was conducted. Human studies published in English until the 5th of July, 2019 were included. Randomised controlled trials and controlled trials with an observation period ...[more]

PMID: 32158525

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIM:To study the influence on the healing of the placement of particulate autogenous bone in the antrostomy and in the subjacent region after maxillary sinus elevation. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Sixteen New Zealand rabbits were undergone to bilateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation with 4?×?4 mm antrostomy dimension. The sinus mucosa was elevated, and the space obtained was filled with xenograft. In the test site (treated sites), autogenous bone was harvested from the tibia and was placed either in the antrostomy and the subjacent region while the control site was left untreated. Antrostomy was covered bilaterally with collagen membranes. Animals were euthanized after 1 and 8 weeks of healing, with 8 rabbits in each group. Histomorphometric evaluations were done. The Wilcoxon test is used for statistical analysis, for a 5% statistical significance. RESULTS:After 1?week of healing, the new bone proportion in the antrostomy was 7.7?±?11.2% and 6.1?±?6.4% in the treated and untreated sites, respectively. In the subjacent region (close-to-window region), hardly any new bone was assessed. In the elevated region, 2.7-2.8% of total new bone was found in both sites. In the antrostomy region, after 8?weeks of healing, 35.5?±?20.9% of new bone in the treated sites, and 28.6?±?24.1% in the untreated sites was observed (p?=?0.499). In the close-to-window region, the respective proportions were 25.8?±?16.1% and 17.6?±?16.3% (p?=?0.018). In the elevated region, the total new bone reached fractions of 27.9?±?12.9% and 23.6?±?15.2% in the treated and untreated sites, respectively (p?=?0.128). CONCLUSIONS:The placement of autogenous bone in the antrostomy and the subjacent region after maxillary sinus elevation, slightly enhanced bone formation compared with sites only grafted with xenograft. Though, only the subjacent close-to-window region showed a statistical significance at 8?weeks of healing. Despite the limitations of the present study, due to its preclinical nature, findings should be extrapolated to humans with caution.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Sinus augmentation can be performed with or without grafting biomaterials, and to date, there is no quality evidence regarding the augmentation of the sinus floor using only platelet concentrates, which can improve the healing period and enhance bone regeneration by stimulating angiogenesis and bone formation. The main objective of this paper was to assess the effect of the sole use of platelet concentrates in sinus augmentation in terms of newly formed bone, augmented bone height, and clinical outcomes and to assess the additional beneficial effects of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) in combination with other grafting biomaterials. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Pooled analyses were performed with the Review Manager software. RESULTS:For sinus elevation only using platelet concentrates, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for qualitative synthesis. Only one study was a clinical trial, which reported improved outcomes for the allograft group compared to the titanium-PRF (T-PRF) group. A total of 12 studies where PRF was used in addition to grafting biomaterials met eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Results from meta-analyses provided no additional beneficial effects of PRF in sinus augmentation in terms of bone height and percentage of soft tissue area. There was a statistically significant lower percentage of residual bone substitute material in the PRF (+) group compared to the PRF (-) group. The percentage of newly formed bone was slightly higher in the PRF (+) group, but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION:There is no robust evidence to make firm conclusions regarding the beneficial effects of the sole use of platelet concentrates in sinus augmentation. However, studies have shown favorable outcomes regarding implant survival, bone gain, and bone height. The use of PRF with other grafting biomaterials appears to provide no additional beneficial effects in sinus lift procedures, but they may improve the healing period and bone formation. Well-conducted randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are necessary to confirm the available results to provide recommendations for the clinical practice.

Dataset Information

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With or Without Barrier Membrane Coverage of the Lateral Window: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With or Without Barrier Membrane Coverage of the Lateral Window: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets