Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis
Background: Maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) is a procedure to restore vertical bone defects in the posterior maxilla. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are considered a golden standard to investigate the efficacy of treatments. We aimed to conduct a systemic review and meta-analyses of RCTs...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | Advances in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667147622001005 |
| _version_ | 1811195863974805504 |
|---|---|
| author | S.A. Alkaabi G.A. Alsabri D.S. Natsir Kalla S.A. Alavi R. Nurrahma T. Forouzanfar M.N. Helder |
| author_facet | S.A. Alkaabi G.A. Alsabri D.S. Natsir Kalla S.A. Alavi R. Nurrahma T. Forouzanfar M.N. Helder |
| author_sort | S.A. Alkaabi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) is a procedure to restore vertical bone defects in the posterior maxilla. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are considered a golden standard to investigate the efficacy of treatments. We aimed to conduct a systemic review and meta-analyses of RCTs using regenerative materials for MSFA, and to evaluate the risk of bias (RoB) which can still affect trial validity. Methods: Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched up to December 2020. After outcome assessments and meta-analyses, the articles underwent quality assessment methods (according to the Jadad scale and the Delphi list) to evaluate the RoB. Results: Thirty-two studies were included. The meta-analyses found no significant difference between regenerative materials and non-regenerative grafts in new bone formation, augmented bone height, soft tissue area, total bone volume and bone density, but displayed a significant difference in terms of residual bone graft. None mentioned quality assessment methods in their trial. Eighteen out of 32 failed to describe the way of randomisation, 23 studies did not declare a double blinded approach, and 30 studies failed to clarify their blinding procedure. Moreover, allocation concealment (28 studies), intention to treat (32 studies), and patient awareness (29 studies) were not described or mentioned properly in the trials. Conclusion: Meta-analysis showed no significant preference in using regenerative over non-regenerative grafts except when using bone substitutes. The high RoB observed in RCTs implies that quality improvement of CTs is necessary. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T00:49:29Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9ee4717a02614bd1bb0dca8bbe1a98b1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2667-1476 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T00:49:29Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Advances in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery |
| spelling | doaj.art-9ee4717a02614bd1bb0dca8bbe1a98b12022-12-22T03:54:46ZengElsevierAdvances in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery2667-14762022-10-018100350Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysisS.A. Alkaabi0G.A. Alsabri1D.S. Natsir Kalla2S.A. Alavi3R. Nurrahma4T. Forouzanfar5M.N. Helder6Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon/researcher, Amsterdam University Medical Center and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Fujairah Hospital, Emirates Health Services, United Arab Emirates; Corresponding author. Dr. Salem Alkaabi Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery/Oral Pathology, Amsterdam UMC-location VUmc VUmc | Room PK 2Z-028| De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HZ AmsterdamVUmc | Room PK 2Z-028| De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon/researcher, Amsterdam University Medical Center and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsOral and Maxillofacial Surgeon/researcher, Amsterdam University Medical Center and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; General Practitioner, Dept. of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, IndonesiaOral and Maxillofacial Surgeon/researcher, Amsterdam University Medical Center and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsProsthodontist, Dept. of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, IndonesiaOral and Maxillofacial Surgeon/researcher, Amsterdam University Medical Center and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsBiochemist, Associate Professor, Dept. Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery / Oral Pathology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsBackground: Maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) is a procedure to restore vertical bone defects in the posterior maxilla. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are considered a golden standard to investigate the efficacy of treatments. We aimed to conduct a systemic review and meta-analyses of RCTs using regenerative materials for MSFA, and to evaluate the risk of bias (RoB) which can still affect trial validity. Methods: Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched up to December 2020. After outcome assessments and meta-analyses, the articles underwent quality assessment methods (according to the Jadad scale and the Delphi list) to evaluate the RoB. Results: Thirty-two studies were included. The meta-analyses found no significant difference between regenerative materials and non-regenerative grafts in new bone formation, augmented bone height, soft tissue area, total bone volume and bone density, but displayed a significant difference in terms of residual bone graft. None mentioned quality assessment methods in their trial. Eighteen out of 32 failed to describe the way of randomisation, 23 studies did not declare a double blinded approach, and 30 studies failed to clarify their blinding procedure. Moreover, allocation concealment (28 studies), intention to treat (32 studies), and patient awareness (29 studies) were not described or mentioned properly in the trials. Conclusion: Meta-analysis showed no significant preference in using regenerative over non-regenerative grafts except when using bone substitutes. The high RoB observed in RCTs implies that quality improvement of CTs is necessary.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667147622001005Maxillary sinus floor augmentationMaxillary sinus floor elevationBone substitutesRisk of biasQuality assessmentBone regeneration |
| spellingShingle | S.A. Alkaabi G.A. Alsabri D.S. Natsir Kalla S.A. Alavi R. Nurrahma T. Forouzanfar M.N. Helder Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis Advances in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Maxillary sinus floor augmentation Maxillary sinus floor elevation Bone substitutes Risk of bias Quality assessment Bone regeneration |
| title | Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis |
| title_full | Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis |
| title_short | Regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials: A meta-analysis |
| title_sort | regenerative graft materials for maxillary sinus elevation in randomized clinical trials a meta analysis |
| topic | Maxillary sinus floor augmentation Maxillary sinus floor elevation Bone substitutes Risk of bias Quality assessment Bone regeneration |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667147622001005 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT saalkaabi regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT gaalsabri regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT dsnatsirkalla regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT saalavi regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT rnurrahma regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT tforouzanfar regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis AT mnhelder regenerativegraftmaterialsformaxillarysinuselevationinrandomizedclinicaltrialsametaanalysis |