Ridge preservation techniques to avoid invasive bone reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis: Naples Consensus Report Working Group C
dc.contributor.author | Barootchi, Shayan | |
dc.contributor.author | Wang, Hom-Lay | |
dc.contributor.author | Ravidà, Andrea | |
dc.contributor.author | Ben Amor, Faten | |
dc.contributor.author | Riccitiello, Francesco | |
dc.contributor.author | Rengo, Carlo | |
dc.contributor.author | Paz, Ana | |
dc.contributor.author | Laino, Luigi | |
dc.contributor.author | Marenzi, Gaetano | |
dc.contributor.author | Gasparro, Roberta | |
dc.contributor.author | Sammartino, Gilberto | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-09-04T04:17:24Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-09-04T04:17:24Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-12 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Int J Oral Implantol 2019;12(4):399–416 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://www.quintessence-publishing.com/deu/en/article/856041 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/169220 | en |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: To analyse and compare the dimensional changes of unassisted extraction sockets with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) techniques and investigate any factors that impact the resorption of the alveolar bone. Materials and methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs). All data were extracted, and a meta-analysis was performed for the changes in all buccolingual ridge width, midbuccal and midlingual ridge height, and mesial and distal ridge height, and horizontal width at reference points apical to the crestal area. Results: Based on 14 RCTs, the effectiveness of ARP in reducing the dimensions of the postextraction alveolar socket was confirmed. The clinical magnitude of this effect was 1.95 mm in the buccolingual ridge width, 1.62 mm in the midbuccal ridge height, and 1.26 mm on the midlingual ridge height. Additionally, 0.45 mm and 0.34 mm for mesial and distal ridge height, and 1.21 mm, and 0.76 mm for ridge width changes at points 3 and 5 mm apical to the crest were noted. Meta-regression analyses revealed that the reflection of flaps and primary wound coverage during ARP may have detrimental effects on bone remodelling, while no statistical significance was observed for any of the bone graft substitutes or the percentage of molar sockets. Conclusions: Regardless of the protocol, ARP can only minimise ridge resorption. ARP is most effective on horizontal ridge width, providing the most benefit coronally (approximating the crest), followed by the midbuccal ridge height. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Quintessence publishing | en_US |
dc.subject | Dental implants | en_US |
dc.subject | evidence-based dentistry | en_US |
dc.title | Ridge preservation techniques to avoid invasive bone reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis: Naples Consensus Report Working Group C | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Dentistry | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Dentistry, School of | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Materials, School of Dental Medicine, University of Siena, Siena, Italy | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31781696 | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/169220/1/BarootchietalIJOI_2019_04_s0399.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | https://dx.doi.org/10.7302/2387 | |
dc.identifier.source | International Journal of Oral Implantology | en_US |
dc.description.filedescription | Description of BarootchietalIJOI_2019_04_s0399.pdf : Full text of published article | |
dc.description.depositor | SELF | en_US |
dc.working.doi | 10.7302/2387 | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Dentistry, School of |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.