TY - JOUR
T1 - Soft tissue dimensional changes after alveolar ridge preservation using different sealing materials: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
AU - Canullo, Luigi
AU - Pesce, Paolo
AU - Antonacci, Donato
AU - Ravidà, Andrea
AU - Galli, Matthew
AU - Khijmatgar, Shahnawaz
AU - Tommasato, Grazia
AU - Sculean, Anton
AU - Del Fabbro, Massimo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Background: Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) is a proactive treatment option aiming at attenuating post-extraction hard and soft tissue dimensional changes. A high number of different types of biomaterials have been utilized during ARP to seal the socket, but their effectiveness in terms of soft tissue outcomes has rarely been investigated and compared in the literature. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of different types of membranes and graft materials in terms of soft tissue outcomes (keratinized tissue width changes, vertical buccal height, and horizontal changes) after ARP, and to assign relative rankings based on their performance. Materials and methods: The manuscript represents the proceedings of a consensus conference of the Italian Society of Osseointegration (IAO). PUBMED (Medline), SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Oral Health’s Information Specialist were utilized to conduct the search up to 06 April 2021. English language restrictions were placed and no limitations were set on publication date. Randomized controlled trials that report ARP procedures using different sealing materials, assessing soft tissue as a primary or secondary outcome, with at least 6-week follow‐up were included. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using mean, standard deviation, sample size, bias, and follow-up duration for all included studies. Network geometry, contribution plots, inconsistency plots, predictive and confidence interval plots, SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) rankings, and multidimensional (MDS) ranking plots were constructed. Results: A total of 11 studies were included for NMA. Overall, the level of bias for included studies was moderate. Crosslinked collagen membranes (SUCRA rank 81.8%) performed best in vertical buccal height (VBH), autogenous soft tissue grafts (SUCRA rank 89.1%) in horizontal width change (HWch), and control (SUCRA rank 85.8%) in keratinized mucosa thickness (KMT). Conclusions: NMA confirmed that the use of crosslinked collagen membranes and autogenous soft tissue grafts represented the best choices for sealing sockets during ARP in terms of minimizing post-extraction soft tissue dimensional shrinkage. Clinical relevance: Grafting materials demonstrated statistically significantly better performances in terms of soft tissue thickness and vertical buccal height changes, when covered with crosslinked collagen membranes. Instead, soft tissue grafts performed better in horizontal width changes. Non-crosslinked membranes and other materials or combinations presented slightly inferior outcomes.
AB - Background: Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) is a proactive treatment option aiming at attenuating post-extraction hard and soft tissue dimensional changes. A high number of different types of biomaterials have been utilized during ARP to seal the socket, but their effectiveness in terms of soft tissue outcomes has rarely been investigated and compared in the literature. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of different types of membranes and graft materials in terms of soft tissue outcomes (keratinized tissue width changes, vertical buccal height, and horizontal changes) after ARP, and to assign relative rankings based on their performance. Materials and methods: The manuscript represents the proceedings of a consensus conference of the Italian Society of Osseointegration (IAO). PUBMED (Medline), SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Oral Health’s Information Specialist were utilized to conduct the search up to 06 April 2021. English language restrictions were placed and no limitations were set on publication date. Randomized controlled trials that report ARP procedures using different sealing materials, assessing soft tissue as a primary or secondary outcome, with at least 6-week follow‐up were included. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using mean, standard deviation, sample size, bias, and follow-up duration for all included studies. Network geometry, contribution plots, inconsistency plots, predictive and confidence interval plots, SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) rankings, and multidimensional (MDS) ranking plots were constructed. Results: A total of 11 studies were included for NMA. Overall, the level of bias for included studies was moderate. Crosslinked collagen membranes (SUCRA rank 81.8%) performed best in vertical buccal height (VBH), autogenous soft tissue grafts (SUCRA rank 89.1%) in horizontal width change (HWch), and control (SUCRA rank 85.8%) in keratinized mucosa thickness (KMT). Conclusions: NMA confirmed that the use of crosslinked collagen membranes and autogenous soft tissue grafts represented the best choices for sealing sockets during ARP in terms of minimizing post-extraction soft tissue dimensional shrinkage. Clinical relevance: Grafting materials demonstrated statistically significantly better performances in terms of soft tissue thickness and vertical buccal height changes, when covered with crosslinked collagen membranes. Instead, soft tissue grafts performed better in horizontal width changes. Non-crosslinked membranes and other materials or combinations presented slightly inferior outcomes.
KW - Alveolar ridge preservation
KW - Collagen membrane
KW - Collagen sponge
KW - Crosslinked
KW - Multidimensional scale
KW - Network meta-analysis
KW - Non-crosslinked
KW - Predictive interval
KW - Ranking
KW - Soft tissue
KW - SUCRA
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117384173&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85117384173&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00784-021-04192-0
DO - 10.1007/s00784-021-04192-0
M3 - Review article
C2 - 34669038
AN - SCOPUS:85117384173
SN - 1432-6981
VL - 26
SP - 13
EP - 39
JO - Clinical Oral Investigations
JF - Clinical Oral Investigations
IS - 1
ER -