Background: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to answer the following focused question based on PICO strategy: In patients who were submitted to horizontal guided bone regeneration, "how efficacious is the combination of substitute bone graft with autogenous bone graft in comparison with substitute bone graft alone, in terms of bone gain?" Material and Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science databases were searched, and hand searches were made up to June 2021, to find randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical effects of autogenous bone graft + substitute bone graft versus substitute bone graft alone in the treatment of horizontal guided bone regeneration. Results: Four trials representing 109 individuals were included. All studies included in this SR used allogeneic bone graft. The meta-analysis did not show any statistically significant difference between the groups, for horizontal bone gain at a distance of 0 mm (MD: -0.46; 95%CI: -1.03 - 0.11) or at a distance of 4 to 5 mm from the top of the crestal alveolar ridge (MD: 0.17; 95%CI: -1.08 - 1.42). Conclusions: Within limitations of this systematic review, it was concluded that the addition of autogenous bone graft to the allogeneic bone graft did not significantly increase the quantity of regenerated bone. Key words:Bone graft, bone regeneration, allograft. Copyright:
Background: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to answer the following focused question based on PICO strategy: In patients who were submitted to horizontal guided bone regeneration, "how efficacious is the combination of substitute bone graft with autogenous bone graft in comparison with substitute bone graft alone, in terms of bone gain?" Material and Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science databases were searched, and hand searches were made up to June 2021, to find randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical effects of autogenous bone graft + substitute bone graft versus substitute bone graft alone in the treatment of horizontal guided bone regeneration. Results: Four trials representing 109 individuals were included. All studies included in this SR used allogeneic bone graft. The meta-analysis did not show any statistically significant difference between the groups, for horizontal bone gain at a distance of 0 mm (MD: -0.46; 95%CI: -1.03 - 0.11) or at a distance of 4 to 5 mm from the top of the crestal alveolar ridge (MD: 0.17; 95%CI: -1.08 - 1.42). Conclusions: Within limitations of this systematic review, it was concluded that the addition of autogenous bone graft to the allogeneic bone graft did not significantly increase the quantity of regenerated bone. Key words:Bone graft, bone regeneration, allograft. Copyright:
Authors: Amir Dasmah; Andreas Thor; Annika Ekestubbe; Lars Sennerby; Lars Rasmusson Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2011-12-03 Impact factor: 2.078
Authors: Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Peter Tugwell; Andre Knottnerus Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-12-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Istvan A Urban; Heiner Nagursky; Jaime L Lozada; Katalin Nagy Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.840