Comparative effectiveness of natural and synthetic bone grafts in oral and maxillofacial surgery prior to insertion of dental implants: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of parallel and cluster randomized controlled trials

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Bone grafts are often used to enhance bone volume/quality prior to implantation insertion. This systematic review compares the histomorphometric effectiveness of bone grafts in an evidence-based manner. DATA Randomized clinical trials comparing histomorphometrically the % of newly-formed bone between two grafts were included. Risk of bias within and across studies was assessed with the Cochrane tool and the GRADE approach, respectively. Random-effects pairwise meta-analyses were conducted, followed by network meta-analysis, network meta-regression and sensitivity analyses. SOURCES Four electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2015 without limitations. STUDY SELECTION A total of 12 trials (5 parallel; 7 cluster) with a total of 231 patients (302 grafted sites) were included. No statistically significant differences were found in the % of new bone from pairwise comparisons between any two bone grafts. Treatment ranking based on the evidence network indicated that autografts presented the highest percentage of new bone, followed by synthetic grafts, xenografts, and allografts. No differences according to patient age, sex, healing time, membrane used or kind of surgical graft use were identified. Our confidence on pairwise comparisons was moderate to very low due to study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision; our confidence on graft ranking was moderate due to study limitations. CONCLUSIONS No significant differences were found in the percentage of new bone between any two grafts. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Synthetic bone substitutes or xenologous bone grafts can be used as an alternative to autologous graft in order to overcome problems of additional surgeries or limited graft availability. A B S T R A C TObjectives: Bone grafts are often used to enhance bone volume / quality prior to implantation insertion. This systematic review compares the histomorphometric effectiveness of bone grafts in an evidencebased manner.Data: Randomized clinical trials comparing histomorphometrically the % of newly-formed bone between two grafts were included. Risk of bias within and across studies was assessed with the Cochrane tool and the GRADE approach, respectively. Random-effects pairwise meta-analyses were conducted, followed by network meta-analysis, network meta-regression and sensitivity analyses.Sources: Four electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2015 without limitations.Study selection: A total of 12 trials (5 parallel; 7 cluster) with a total of 231 patients (302 grafted sites) were included. No statistically significant differences were found in the % of new bone from pairwise comparisons between any two bone grafts. Treatment ranking based on the evidence network indicated that autografts presented the highest % of new bone, followed by synthetic grafts, xenografts, and allografts. No differences according to patient age, sex, healing time, membrane used or kind of surgical graft use were identified. Our confidence on pairwise comparisons was moderate to very l...

Custom-Made Synthetic Scaffolds for Bone Reconstruction: A Retrospective, Multicenter Clinical Study on 15 Patients

“…More recently, synthetic bone grafts (alloplasts) have been introduced, in order to overcome these limitations [19, 33–35]. The fundamental properties that a synthetic material should possess are biocompatibility, bioresorbability, and the presence of an architecture/structure similar to that of natural bone: the internal geometry of the biomaterial is, in fact, crucial for the biological behaviour and for promoting new bone formation [16–19, 35].…”

“…The fundamental properties that a synthetic material should possess are biocompatibility, bioresorbability, and the presence of an architecture/structure similar to that of natural bone: the internal geometry of the biomaterial is, in fact, crucial for the biological behaviour and for promoting new bone formation [16–19, 35]. The modern synthetic porous scaffolds possess a controlled, high porosity and they have a honeycomb structure with several interconnections between different pores [16–19].…”

“…The exposure of the synthetic scaffold must be considered an adverse event and a difficult complication to manage: in fact, it can lead to partial or complete loss of the graft [20, 21]. In the last few years, several synthetic scaffolds with different macro- and microporosity and geometry have been introduced [16–19, 35]. These materials can certainly improve the healing processes; however, the perfect characteristics for a synthetic porous scaffold still need to be elucidated.…”

Mineral-Doped Poly(L-lactide) Acid Scaffolds Enriched with Exosomes Improve Osteogenic Commitment of Human Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells

“…Bone defects and mainly oral bone defects are widely present in the world population, for a several number of pathological conditions, such as periapical bone lesions, cysts, tumor, bone atrophies, and bone trauma [1][2][3]. Bone tissue, unlike other tissues possesses the possibility to heal and remodel [4][5][6][7].…”

Appositional bone graft tunneled: Technical note

“…Since then, numerous papers have been published that have presented a variety of procedures involving different types of implants, bone grafts, and other graft materials for oral and craniofacial reconstructions [2], [3].…”