Combination of Enamel Matrix Derivatives with Bone Graft vs Bone Graft Alone in the Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony and Furcation Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ibrahim Fidan, Julien Labreuche, Olivier Huck, Kevimy Agossa
{"title":"Combination of Enamel Matrix Derivatives with Bone Graft vs Bone Graft Alone in the Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony and Furcation Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Ibrahim Fidan, Julien Labreuche, Olivier Huck, Kevimy Agossa","doi":"10.3290/j.ohpd.b5871494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the clinical performance of the combination of enamel matrix derivatives and bone substitutes (EMD+BG) with bone substitutes (BG) alone in the surgical treatment of periodontal intrabony and furcation defects.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Electronic databases (Medline, Embase and Web of Science) were searched for randomised controlled trials in humans that investigated the combination of EMD+BG vs BG alone in either intrabony or furcation defects with a minimal follow-up of 6 months. A random-effect meta-analysis was conducted according to the type of defect (intrabony or furcation defects) and the follow-up time (6 or ≥ 12 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From a total of 1583 entries, 9 randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were retrieved and included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. All of them were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis detected an additional clinical attachment level (CAL) gain in intrabony defects treated with EMD+BG compared to BG alone in studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up (mean difference = 0.67 mm, 95% CI [0.44 ; 0.90], p 0.00001). No additional benefit was found in furcation defects in terms of CAL gain or probing depth (PD) reduction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The addition of EMD may improve the clinical outcomes of intrabony defects treated with bone substitutes. These findings may support the use of this combined therapy, particularly in large and non-contained defects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19696,"journal":{"name":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","volume":"22 ","pages":"655-664"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral health & preventive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.ohpd.b5871494","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the clinical performance of the combination of enamel matrix derivatives and bone substitutes (EMD+BG) with bone substitutes (BG) alone in the surgical treatment of periodontal intrabony and furcation defects.
Materials and methods: Electronic databases (Medline, Embase and Web of Science) were searched for randomised controlled trials in humans that investigated the combination of EMD+BG vs BG alone in either intrabony or furcation defects with a minimal follow-up of 6 months. A random-effect meta-analysis was conducted according to the type of defect (intrabony or furcation defects) and the follow-up time (6 or ≥ 12 months).
Results: From a total of 1583 entries, 9 randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were retrieved and included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. All of them were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis detected an additional clinical attachment level (CAL) gain in intrabony defects treated with EMD+BG compared to BG alone in studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up (mean difference = 0.67 mm, 95% CI [0.44 ; 0.90], p 0.00001). No additional benefit was found in furcation defects in terms of CAL gain or probing depth (PD) reduction.
Conclusion: The addition of EMD may improve the clinical outcomes of intrabony defects treated with bone substitutes. These findings may support the use of this combined therapy, particularly in large and non-contained defects.
目的:比较牙釉质基质衍生物联合骨替代物(EMD+;BG)与单纯骨替代物(BG)在牙周骨内及分叉缺损手术治疗中的临床表现。材料和方法:在电子数据库(Medline、Embase和Web of Science)中检索随机对照人体试验,这些试验调查了联合使用emd和单独使用BG对骨内或功能缺陷的影响,随访时间最短为6个月。根据缺损类型(骨内缺损或功能缺损)及随访时间(6个月或≥12个月)进行随机效应meta分析。结果:从1583个条目中检索到9个随机对照临床试验(RCTs),并纳入定性和定量综合。所有这些都被纳入meta分析。荟萃分析发现,在随访≥12个月的研究中,与单独使用BG相比,使用emd和BG治疗骨内缺陷的临床附着水平(CAL)增加(平均差异= 0.67 mm, 95% CI [0.44;0.90], p 0.00001)。在CAL增益或探测深度(PD)降低方面,没有发现功能缺陷的额外好处。结论:EMD的加入可改善骨代用品治疗骨内缺损的临床效果。这些发现可能支持使用这种联合治疗,特别是在大的和不含缺陷。
期刊介绍:
Clinicians, general practitioners, teachers, researchers, and public health administrators will find this journal an indispensable source of essential, timely information about scientific progress in the fields of oral health and the prevention of caries, periodontal diseases, oral mucosal diseases, and dental trauma. Central topics, including oral hygiene, oral epidemiology, oral health promotion, and public health issues, are covered in peer-reviewed articles such as clinical and basic science research reports; reviews; invited focus articles, commentaries, and guest editorials; and symposium, workshop, and conference proceedings.