Dataset Information

Relative performance of various biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess the histomorphometric outcomes obtained in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with different biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA).

Materials and methods

A search of the existing medical literature until October 1, 2019, was performed. Inclusion criteria were (a) RCTs assessing a two-stage MSA from the lateral approach using autologous bone or biomaterials for grafting and (b) reported histomorphometric outcomes based on crestal bone core biopsy samples. The Bayesian method was used to perform pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis (NMA). The primary outcome, the new bone percentage (NB %), was calculated as mean differences with 95% credible intervals. The interventions were ranked by their posterior probability by calculating the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.

Results

Thirty-four RCTs (842 MSAs) were included in the analysis with a normal healing period (5-8 months). All comparisons were presented in a league table. On the basis of the ranking probability, the most effective bone grafting material for NB% was bovine xenograft + bone marrow concentrate (BMC) (81%), followed by bovine xenograft + platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (77%), bioactive glass ceramic + autologous bone 1:1 (70%), nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite in silica gel (70%), and bioactive glass ceramic (70%). Autologous bone graft alone took the twelfth position with 57%.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of the present NMA, the analysis did not confirm autologous bone alone as the gold standard for MSA and showed superiority of composite grafts such as bovine xenograft + BMC after 5-8 months of healing.

SUBMITTER: Trimmel B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8247032 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives:To evaluate the performances of six different bone substitute materials used as graft in maxillary sinus augmentation by means of histological and histomorphometric analysis of bone biopsies retrieved from human subjects after a 6-month healing period. Materials and Methods:Six consecutive patients (3 males, 3 females, aged 50-72 years), healthy, nonsmokers, and with good oral hygiene, presenting edentulous posterior maxilla with a residual bone crest measuring ? 4 mm in vertical height and 3 to 5 mm in horizontal thickness at radiographic examination, were selected to receive sinus augmentation and delayed implant placement. Under randomized conditions, sinus augmentation procedures were carried out using mineralized solvent-dehydrated bone allograft (MCBA), freeze-dried mineralized bone allograft (FDBA), anorganic bovine bone (ABB), equine-derived bone (EB), synthetic micro-macroporous biphasic calcium-phosphate block consisting of 70% beta-tricalcium phosphate and 30% hydroxyapatite (HA-?-TCP 30/70), or bioapatite-collagen (BC). After 6 months, bone core biopsies were retrieved and 13 implants were placed. Bone samples were processed for histological and histomorphometric analysis. CT scans were taken before and after surgery. After 4 months of healing, patients were restored with a provisional fixed acrylic resin prosthesis, as well as after further 2-4 months with a definitive cemented zirconia or porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. Results:There were no postoperative complications or implant failures. The histological examination showed that all biomaterials were in close contact with newly formed bone, surrounding the graft granules with a bridge-like network. No signs of acute inflammation were observed. The histomorphometry revealed 20.1% newly formed bone for MCBA, 32.1% for FDBA, 16.1% for ABB, 22.8% for EB, 20.3% for HA-?-TCP 30/70, and 21.4% for BC. Conclusions:Within the limitations of the present investigation, all the six tested biomaterials showed good biocompatibility and osteoconductive properties when used in sinus augmentation procedures, although the FDBA seemed to have a better histomorphometric result in terms of newly formed bone and residual graft material. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (Registration Number): NCT03496688.

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.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence has been provided that a cell-based therapy combined with the use of bioactive materials may significantly improve bone regeneration prior to dental implant, although the identification of an ideal source of progenitor/stem cells remains to be determined.AimIn the present research, the bone regenerative property of an emerging source of progenitor cells, the amniotic epithelial cells (AEC), loaded on a calcium-phosphate synthetic bone substitute, made by direct rapid prototyping (rPT) technique, was evaluated in an animal study.Material and methodsTwo blocks of synthetic bone substitute (?0.14 cm(3)), alone or engineered with 1×10(6) ovine AEC (oAEC), were grafted bilaterally into maxillary sinuses of six adult sheep, an animal model chosen for its high translational value in dentistry. The sheep were then randomly divided into two groups and sacrificed at 45 and 90 days post implantation (p.i.). Tissue regeneration was evaluated in the sinus explants by micro-computer tomography (micro-CT), morphological, morphometric and biochemical analyses.Results and conclusionsThe obtained data suggest that scaffold integration and bone deposition are positively influenced by allotransplantated oAEC. Sinus explants derived from sheep grafted with oAEC engineered scaffolds displayed a reduced fibrotic reaction, a limited inflammatory response and an accelerated process of angiogenesis. In addition, the presence of oAEC significantly stimulated osteogenesis either by enhancing bone deposition or making more extent the foci of bone nucleation. Besides the modulatory role played by oAEC in the crucial events successfully guiding tissue regeneration (angiogenesis, vascular endothelial growth factor expression and inflammation), data provided herein show that oAEC were also able to directly participate in the process of bone deposition, as suggested by the presence of oAEC entrapped within the newly deposited osteoid matrix and by their ability to switch-on the expression of a specific bone-related protein (osteocalcin, OCN) when transplanted into host tissues.