Effect of Platelet Concentrates on Marginal Bone Loss of Immediate Implant Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Serrano J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8401659 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Effect of Platelet Concentrates on Marginal Bone Loss of Immediate Implant Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
González-Serrano José J Vallina Carmen C González-Serrano Carlos C Sánchez-Monescillo Andrés A Torres Jesús J Hernández Gonzalo G López-Pintor Rosa María RM
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 20210815 16
<h4>Background</h4>To evaluate marginal bone loss (MBL) in immediate implant procedures (IIP) placed in conjunction with platelet concentrates (PCs) compared to IIP without PCs.<h4>Methods</h4>A search was performed in four databases. Clinical trials evaluating MBL of IIP placed with and without PCs were included. The random effects model was conducted for meta-analysis.<h4>Results</h4>Eight clinical trials that evaluated MBL in millimeters were included. A total of 148 patients and 232 immediat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundOsseointegration is essential for the success and stability of implants. Platelet concentrates were reported to enhance osseointegration and improve implant stability. The purpose of this review is to systematically analyze the effects of platelet concentrates on implant stability and marginal bone loss.MethodsTwo researchers independently performed searches in the following databases (last searched on 21 July 2021): MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science. In addition, a manual search was carried out on references of relevant reviews and initially included studies. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) on the application of platelet concentrates in the implant surgery procedure were included. The risk of bias of RCTs and CCTs were assessed with a revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) and the risk of bias in non-randomized studies-of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, respectively. Meta-analyses on implant stability and marginal bone loss were conducted. Researchers used mean difference or standardized mean difference as the effect size and calculated the 95% confidence interval. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed based on the following factors: type of platelet concentrates, method of application, and study design.ResultsFourteen studies with 284 participants and 588 implants were included in the final analysis. 11 studies reported implant stability and 5 studies reported marginal bone level or marginal bone loss. 3 studies had high risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that platelet concentrates can significantly increase implant stability at 1 week (6 studies, 302 implants, MD 4.26, 95% CI 2.03-6.49, P < 0.001) and 4 weeks (8 studies, 373 implants, MD 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.88, P < 0.001) after insertion, significantly reduced marginal bone loss at 3 months after insertion (4 studies, 95 implants, mesial: MD - 0.33, 95% CI - 0.46 to - 0.20, P < 0.001; distal: MD - 0.38, 95% CI - 0.54 to - 0.22, P < 0.001). However, the improvement of implant stability at 12 weeks after insertion was limited (P = 0.10). Subgroup analysis showed that PRP did not significantly improve implant stability at 1 week and 4 weeks after insertion (P = 0.38, P = 0.17). Platelet concentrates only placed in the implant sites did not significantly improve implant stability at 1 week after insertion (P = 0.20).ConclusionsPlatelet concentrates can significantly improve implant stability and reduce marginal bone loss in the short term. Large-scale studies with long follow-up periods are required to explore their long-term effects and compare effects of different types.Trial registrationThis study was registered on PROSPERO, with the Registration Number being CRD42021270214.
| S-EPMC8588658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Gingival recessions are vastly prevalent among the general population. With regards to their treatment, recent advancements in periodontal and microsurgical procedures, focusing on minimal invasiveness and patient-centered therapies, have propelled a shift in their contemporary treatment, highlighting the field of biologics and bioactive mediators. Among different classes and types of biologics, autologous platelet concentrates (APCs), also referred to as autologous blood-derived products, are commonly used and preferred among many clinicians. These are essentially obtained via venipuncture (intravenous access) followed by centrifugation, for which numerous protocols and preparation methods have been used, leading to varieties of blood-derived products. In this review, via a systematic search, we explored the efficacy of the different utilized preparation methods and centrifugation protocols of APCs (e.g., platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), leucocyte-PRF, advanced-PRF, concentrated growth factor (CGF), etc.) for the treatment of type 1 gingival recessions (RT1, without interproximal attachment loss or noticeable tooth displacement), as well as their effectiveness relative to a common control (treatment with flap advancement alone without any additional material). Based on the available literature from randomized trials found in our systematic search, we observed that utilization of PRF can significantly enhance treatment outcomes when performing a coronally advanced flap, in terms of the amount of root coverage. The improvement in root coverage was further enhanced in the presence of baseline keratinized tissue width, and with an increasing relative magnitude (the more the baseline keratinized tissue width, the better the root coverage outcomes when using PRF). The efficacy of these products needs to be further explored with different graft substitutes and matrices, as well as relative to other commonly applied biologics, through well-conducted and adequately-powered randomized clinical trials.
| S-EPMC11808447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmediate loading has recently been introduced into unsplinted mandibular implant-retained overdentures for the management of edentulous patients due to their increasing demand on immediate aesthetics and function. However, there is still a scarcity of meta-analytical evidence on the efficacy of immediate loading compared to delayed loading in unsplinted mandibular implant-retained overdentures. The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants between immediate and delayed loading of unsplinted mandibular implant-retained overdentures.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and cohort studies quantitatively comparing the MBL around implants between immediate loading protocol (ILP) and delayed loading protocol (DLP) of unsplinted mandibular overdentures were included. A systematic search was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases on December 02, 2020. "Grey" literature was also searched. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the pooled MBL of two different loading protocols of unsplinted mandibular overdentures through weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The subgroup analysis was performed between different attachment types (i.e. Locator attachment vs. ball anchor). The risk of bias within and across studies were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and Egger's test.ResultsOf 328 records, five RCTs and two cohort studies were included and evaluated, which totally contained 191 participants with 400 implants. The MBL of ILP group showed no significant difference with that of DLP group (WMD 0.04, CI - 0.13 to 0.21, P > .05). The subgroup analysis revealed similar results with Locator attachments or ball anchors (P > .05). Apart from one RCT (20%) with a high risk of bias, four RCTs (80%) showed a moderate risk of bias. Two prospective cohort studies were proved with acceptable quality. Seven included studies have reported 5.03% implant failure rate (10 of 199 implants) in ILP group and 1.00% failure rate (2 of 201 implants) in DLP group in total.ConclusionsFor unsplinted mandibular implant-retained overdentures, the MBL around implants after ILP seems comparable to that of implants after DLP. Immediate loading may be a promising alternative to delayed loading for the management of unsplinted mandibular implant-retained overdentures. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020159124.
| S-EPMC7968211 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Several clinical trials have recently been conducted to elucidate the effectiveness of photofunctionalization. The aim of this review was to systematically analyze the clinical effects of photofunctionalization on implant stability and marginal bone loss (MBL). Methods: An electronic search in four databases and a manual search were conducted in September 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials (CCTs), and cohort and case-control studies evaluating the effects of photofunctionalization on implant stability or marginal bone loss (MBL) in humans were included. The methodological quality assessment using RoB 2.0 and the ROBINS-I tool was performed based on different study designs. Results: Seven studies were included for a qualitative analysis, and five of them were chosen for a meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that photofunctionalization significantly improved the stability of the implant 2 months after implantation (p = 0.04; MD = 3.48; 95% CI = −0.23 to 6.73) and increased the osseointegration speed index (OSI) (p = 0.007; MD = 2.13; 95% CI = 0.57 to 3.68). However, no significant improvements of implant stability were observed 2 weeks (p = 0.62), 4 weeks (p = 0.31), nor 4 months (p = 0.24) after implantation. The evaluation presented no significant reductions in MBL. Conclusions: Based on the positive effect of photofunctionalization on the rate of establishing implant stability, photofunctionalization may provide an effective and practical strategy to achieve faster osseointegration and reduce the overall healing time. Photofunctionalization appears to improve the implant stability. However, the clinical effect of photofunctionalization on MBL remains unclear due to the shortage of available studies.
| S-EPMC9739233 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSandblasting is one of the oldest implant surface modifications to enhance osseointegration. Regarding its superiority over machined surface controversies still exist. Our objective was to compare implant failures (IF) and marginal bone level (MBL) changes between sandblasted and machined dental implants by a meta-analysis utilizing the available data. The PROSPERO registration number of the meta-analysis is CRD42018084190.MethodsThe systematic search was performed in Cochrane, Embase and Pubmed. Inclusion criteria included participants with neither systemic diseases, nor excessive alcohol consumption, nor heavy smoking. We calculated pooled Risk Ratio (RRs) with confidence intervals of 95% (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes (implant failure) and weighted mean difference (WMD) CIs of 95% for continuous outcomes (marginal bone level change). We applied the random effect model with DerSimonian-Laird estimation. I2 and chi2 tests were used to quantify statistical heterogeneity and gain probability-values, respectively.ResultsLiterature search revealed 130 records without duplicates. Out of these, seven studies met the inclusion criteria and all were included in data synthesis, involving 362 sand-blasted and 360 machined implants. The results indicate that there is an 80% (RR = 0.2 95% CI:0.06-0.67; I2 = 0.0% p = 0.986) lower among sandblasted compared to machined implants after one year of use and 74% (RR = 0.26 95% CI:0.09-0.74; I2 = 0.0% p = 0.968) five years of use, respectively. In contrast, there is no significant difference in MBL (WMD:-0.10mm, 95% CI:-0.20, 0.01; p>0.05; I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.560 and WMD:-0.01mm, 95% CI:-0.12, 0.09; p>0.05; I2 = 26.2%, p = 0.258) between the two implant surfaces after one and five years of use.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis reveals that sandblasting is superior over machined surface in implant failure but not in marginal bone level in healthy subjects. It also points out the need for further randomized clinical trials with large sample size for objective determination of the clinical benefits of certain implant surface modifications.
| S-EPMC6499471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we analyzed the influence of prosthetic abutment height on marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants in the posterior maxilla. In this retrospective cohort study, the radiographically determined MBL was related to the height of the abutments of internal conical connection implants at 6 and 18 months post-loading. Data were gathered on age, sex, bone substratum, smoking habit, history of periodontitis, and prosthetic features, among other variables. A linear mixed model was used for statistical analysis. The study included 131 patients receiving 315 implants. MBL rates at 6 and 18 months were mainly affected by the abutment height but were also significantly influenced by the bone substratum, periodontitis, and smoking habit. MBL rates were higher for prosthetic abutment < 2 mm vs. ≥ 2 mm, for periodontal vs. non-periodontal patients, for grafted vs. pristine bone, and for a heavier smoking habit. The abutment height is a key factor in MBL. MBL rates followed a non-linear trend, with a greater MBL rate during the first 6 months post-loading than during the next 12 months.
| S-EPMC4293716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocket preservation is a proactive approach that limits bone loss after tooth extraction to maintain adequate bone volume, height and width. Many methods have proven effective in achieving socket preservation, including using various bone grafts and autologous platelet concentrates (APCs). Combining these two methods may lead to improved results in socket preservation and patient outcomes.AimsTo compare the combined use of APCs and bone grafts in socket preservation, with the use of bone grafts alone. Primary outcomes were radiographic vertical bone loss (VBL) and horizontal bone loss (HBL).MethodsA search on Pubmed, Scopus, Embase and Google Scholar databases was conducted to identify human studies using APCs in extraction sockets between January 2014 and August 2024. The inclusion criteria involved comparative human studies ranging from evidence levels II to III (Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence). For assessing bias in the included studies, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools were used. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the quality of evidence available.ResultsA total of five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the analysis. Studies included the use of platelet rich fibrin (PRF), injectable platelet rich fibrin (i-PRF), advanced platelet rich fibrin (A-PRF), advanced platelet rich fibrin plus (A-PRF+) and concentrated growth factors (CGF). The risk of bias was judged high and moderate for two out of five RCTs. The analysis revealed a combined effect size for VBL reduction, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.83 (p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval (CI) = [-1.2, -0.57]; I² = 73.13%). For HBL reduction, the combined effect size was SMD = -0.72 (p < 0.001; 95% CI = [-1.08, -0.37]; I² = 68.34%). The overall evidence quality rating for the use of APCs in combination with bone grafts to reduce VBL during socket preservation was assessed as moderate, whereas to reduce HBL it was determined to be low.ConclusionThe current literature demonstrates the added benefits of APCs combined with bone grafts in alveolar socket preservation compared to bone grafts alone in reducing vertical and horizontal bone loss. However, based on the GRADE assessment, the quality of evidence was judged low-to-moderate. Further randomised clinical studies would increase the certainty of the evidence.
| S-EPMC11802899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The clinical value of ligature-induced experimental peri-implantitis studies has been questioned due to the artificial nature of the model. Despite repeated claims that ligatures of silk, cotton and other materials may not induce bone resorption by themselves; a recent review showed that the tissue reaction toward them has not been investigated. Hence, the current study aimed to explore the hard and soft tissue reactions toward commonly used ligature materials. A total of 60 dental implants were inserted into the femur (n = 20) and tibia (n = 40) of 10 rabbits. The femoral implants were ligated with sterile 3-0 braided silk in one leg and sterile cotton retraction chord in the other leg. The tibial implants were ligated with silk or left as non-ligated controls. All wounds were closed in layers. After a healing time of 8 weeks, femoral (silk versus cotton) and proximal tibial (silk versus non-ligated control) implants were investigated histologically. Distal tibial (silk versus non-ligated control) implants were investigated with real time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The distance from the implant-top to first bone contact point was longer for silk ligated implants compared to non-ligated controls (p = 0.007), but did not vary between cotton and silk. The ligatures triggered an immunological reaction with cell infiltrates in close contact with the ligature materials, adjacent soft tissue encapsulation and bone resorption. qPCR further demonstrated an upregulated immune response toward the silk ligatures compared to non-ligated controls. Silk and cotton ligatures provoke foreign body reactions of soft tissue encapsulation type and bone resorption around implants in the absence of plaque.
| S-EPMC6723089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe 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.MethodsElectronic (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.ResultsNo 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 × 1086 ). 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.ConclusionReconstructive 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.
| S-EPMC9315147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this prospective study was to assess marginal bone level (MBL), buccal and palatal bone thickness reduction (BTR) around implants in delayed and immediate placement protocols, 6 months after loading.Materials and methodsTwenty-four patients were assigned to two treatment groups, and treated with an immediate (Test) or delayed implant placement (Control). Baseline and 6 months post-loading periapical and Cone Beam Computed Tomography radiographs were used to measure mesial, distal, buccal, and palatal MBL change, and buccal and palatal BTR.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference between groups, in MBL change, mesially (p = 0.4220), distally (p = 0.774), buccally (p = 0.221), and palatally (p = 0.195). There was more MBL change on the buccal side than on the palatal side in both groups, control (p = 0.012) and test (p = 0.005). Buccal bone thickness decreased significantly in both groups, and at all four levels (p < 0.05). Buccal BTR was higher in test implants at 0, 2, and 4 mm (p = 0.005, p = 0.0018, p = 0.006) on the buccal side, and at 0 mm (p = 0.006) on the palatal side. Implant stability increased in both groups (p < 0.001). A positive correlation was found between insertion torque and stability in the control group (p = 0.024).ConclusionsWithin the study limitations, MBL changes occur around implants and are comparable between groups. More buccal than palatal MBL change occurs in both groups. Buccal BTR is higher in immediate cases. Implant stability augmented in both groups.Clinical relevanceThis data call for additive therapy to compensate for the expected bone loss, particularly in esthetically demanding cases.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04346706 Registered 14 April 2020 - Retrospectively registered, http://www.clinicalTrials.gov.
| S-EPMC9192900 | biostudies-literature