Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Biomed Rep ; 21(4): 139, 2024 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39161939

RESUMEN

The aim of the present systematic review was to compare three ridge augmentation procedures in order to assist clinicians in finding the ideal surgical method relative to the horizontal bone gain needed and the width of the alveolar ridge available. An electronic and hand literature search was performed in the online databases PubMed-Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register and Web of Science, and various specialized journals, between January 2017 and December 2022. The included studies were evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies score and Cochrane's RoB tool. The primary variable studied in the meta-analysis was the final bone gain. The implant survival rate and initial ridge width were the secondary variables. Then four studies on ridge expansion via osseodensification (OD), seven on guided bone regeneration (GBR) and seven on the ridge-split technique (RS) were included in the review; 17 out of 18 were selected for meta-analysis. The mean horizontal bone gain for OD was 2.151 mm [1.327-2.975 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI)], for GBR was 4.036 mm (3.351-4.772 mm 95%CI) and for RS was 3.661 mm (2.991-4.399 mm 95%CI). The results were statistically significant (P=0.002). GBR reported the most bone gain horizontally, followed closely by RS and then OD. OD is a recent technique that should be taken into account when discussing the protocols of horizontally atrophied ridge rehabilitation.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA