Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Objectives To determine whether photofunctionalization influences dental implant osseointegration. Material and methods Data on osseointegration rates were extracted from 8 databases, based on bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and pushout tests. Internal validity was accessed through the SYRCLE risk of...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2020-09, Vol.31 (9), p.785-802 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 802 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 785 |
| container_title | Clinical oral implants research |
| container_volume | 31 |
| creator | Dini, Caroline Nagay, Bruna Egumi Magno, Marcela Baraúna Maia, Lucianne Cople Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo |
| description | Objectives
To determine whether photofunctionalization influences dental implant osseointegration.
Material and methods
Data on osseointegration rates were extracted from 8 databases, based on bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and pushout tests. Internal validity was accessed through the SYRCLE risk of bias tool for animal experimental studies. Meta‐analyses were performed for investigation of the influence of photofunctionalization on implant osseointegration, with a random effect and a confidence interval of 95%. The certainty of evidence was accessed through the GRADE approach.
Results
Thirty‐four records were identified, and 10 were included in the meta‐analysis. Photofunctionalized implants showed higher mean values for BIC in rabbits (MD 6.92 [1.01, 12.82], p = .02), dogs (MD 23.70 [10.23, 37.16], p = .001), rats (MD 20.93 [12.91, 28.95], p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/clr.13627 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2415836027</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2440254610</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4897-e4a78750319fdba59c910f36d636af72f6c73c24326221482f87865416ee68153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1uFDEQhS0EIkNgwQWQJTaw6MT_7l5GI_6kkUAI1i2Pu8w4crcH251oWOUILHLCnAQPHVggURuX5K-eXtVD6DklZ7TWuQ3pjHLF9AO0ooqQhkhCH6IV6YhsNFX0BD3J-ZIQorq2e4xOOJNK8I6t0O2nXSzRzZMtPk4m-B_m2GCTscF59sVsA2Cz36do7A6XiP1Y-yvAZQc45gzRTwW-pWUsuuN_MFPJ2FeVyY8m4DEOEPLdze0FzodcYKywxQmuPFxXZsAjFHN389NUA4fs81P0yJmQ4dn9e4q-vn3zZf2-2Xx892F9sWmsaDvdgDC61ZJw2rlha2RnO0ocV4PiyjjNnLKaWyY4U4xR0TLX6lZJQRWAaqnkp-jVols3-j5DLv3os4VQ_UOcc88ElS1XhOmKvvwHvYxzqn6PlCBMCkVJpV4vlE31NAlcv0_1AunQU9Ifo-prVP3vqCr74l5x3o4w_CX_ZFOB8wW49gEO_1fq15vPi-Qv5Z6hDg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2440254610</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Dini, Caroline ; Nagay, Bruna Egumi ; Magno, Marcela Baraúna ; Maia, Lucianne Cople ; Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</creator><creatorcontrib>Dini, Caroline ; Nagay, Bruna Egumi ; Magno, Marcela Baraúna ; Maia, Lucianne Cople ; Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
To determine whether photofunctionalization influences dental implant osseointegration.
Material and methods
Data on osseointegration rates were extracted from 8 databases, based on bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and pushout tests. Internal validity was accessed through the SYRCLE risk of bias tool for animal experimental studies. Meta‐analyses were performed for investigation of the influence of photofunctionalization on implant osseointegration, with a random effect and a confidence interval of 95%. The certainty of evidence was accessed through the GRADE approach.
Results
Thirty‐four records were identified, and 10 were included in the meta‐analysis. Photofunctionalized implants showed higher mean values for BIC in rabbits (MD 6.92 [1.01, 12.82], p = .02), dogs (MD 23.70 [10.23, 37.16], p = .001), rats (MD 20.93 [12.91, 28.95], p < .0001), and in the pooled BIC analyses (MD 14.23 [7.80, 20.66], p < .0001) compared to those in control implants in the overall assay. Conversely, at late healing periods, the pooled BIC meta‐analyses showed no statistically significant differences (p > .05) for photofunctionalized and control implants at 12 weeks of follow‐up. For pushout analysis, photofunctionalized implants presented greater bone strength integration (MD 19.92 [13.88, 25.96], p < .0001) compared to that of control implants. The heterogeneity between studies ranged from “not important” to “moderate” for rabbits I2 = 24%, dogs I2 = 0%, rats I2 = 0%, and pooled BIC (I2 = 49%), while considerable heterogeneity was observed for pushouts (I2 = 90%).
Conclusion
Photofunctionalization improves osseointegration in the initial healing period of implants, as summarized from available data from rabbit, dog, and rat in vivo models.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0905-7161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/clr.13627</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32564392</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Denmark: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Animal models ; Animal research ; Animals ; Bone implants ; Bone strength ; Confidence intervals ; Dental Implants ; Dental materials ; Dental prosthetics ; Dogs ; Healing ; Heterogeneity ; In vivo methods and tests ; Meta-analysis ; Models, Animal ; Osseointegration ; photofunctionalization ; Rabbits ; Rats ; Statistical analysis ; Surface Properties ; Surgical implants ; Titanium ; ultraviolet rays</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral implants research, 2020-09, Vol.31 (9), p.785-802</ispartof><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4897-e4a78750319fdba59c910f36d636af72f6c73c24326221482f87865416ee68153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4897-e4a78750319fdba59c910f36d636af72f6c73c24326221482f87865416ee68153</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3618-190X ; 0000-0002-6391-9917</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fclr.13627$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fclr.13627$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32564392$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dini, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagay, Bruna Egumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magno, Marcela Baraúna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maia, Lucianne Cople</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</creatorcontrib><title>Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><title>Clinical oral implants research</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><description>Objectives
To determine whether photofunctionalization influences dental implant osseointegration.
Material and methods
Data on osseointegration rates were extracted from 8 databases, based on bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and pushout tests. Internal validity was accessed through the SYRCLE risk of bias tool for animal experimental studies. Meta‐analyses were performed for investigation of the influence of photofunctionalization on implant osseointegration, with a random effect and a confidence interval of 95%. The certainty of evidence was accessed through the GRADE approach.
Results
Thirty‐four records were identified, and 10 were included in the meta‐analysis. Photofunctionalized implants showed higher mean values for BIC in rabbits (MD 6.92 [1.01, 12.82], p = .02), dogs (MD 23.70 [10.23, 37.16], p = .001), rats (MD 20.93 [12.91, 28.95], p < .0001), and in the pooled BIC analyses (MD 14.23 [7.80, 20.66], p < .0001) compared to those in control implants in the overall assay. Conversely, at late healing periods, the pooled BIC meta‐analyses showed no statistically significant differences (p > .05) for photofunctionalized and control implants at 12 weeks of follow‐up. For pushout analysis, photofunctionalized implants presented greater bone strength integration (MD 19.92 [13.88, 25.96], p < .0001) compared to that of control implants. The heterogeneity between studies ranged from “not important” to “moderate” for rabbits I2 = 24%, dogs I2 = 0%, rats I2 = 0%, and pooled BIC (I2 = 49%), while considerable heterogeneity was observed for pushouts (I2 = 90%).
Conclusion
Photofunctionalization improves osseointegration in the initial healing period of implants, as summarized from available data from rabbit, dog, and rat in vivo models.</description><subject>Animal models</subject><subject>Animal research</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Bone implants</subject><subject>Bone strength</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Dental Implants</subject><subject>Dental materials</subject><subject>Dental prosthetics</subject><subject>Dogs</subject><subject>Healing</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>In vivo methods and tests</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Models, Animal</subject><subject>Osseointegration</subject><subject>photofunctionalization</subject><subject>Rabbits</subject><subject>Rats</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surface Properties</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Titanium</subject><subject>ultraviolet rays</subject><issn>0905-7161</issn><issn>1600-0501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU1uFDEQhS0EIkNgwQWQJTaw6MT_7l5GI_6kkUAI1i2Pu8w4crcH251oWOUILHLCnAQPHVggURuX5K-eXtVD6DklZ7TWuQ3pjHLF9AO0ooqQhkhCH6IV6YhsNFX0BD3J-ZIQorq2e4xOOJNK8I6t0O2nXSzRzZMtPk4m-B_m2GCTscF59sVsA2Cz36do7A6XiP1Y-yvAZQc45gzRTwW-pWUsuuN_MFPJ2FeVyY8m4DEOEPLdze0FzodcYKywxQmuPFxXZsAjFHN389NUA4fs81P0yJmQ4dn9e4q-vn3zZf2-2Xx892F9sWmsaDvdgDC61ZJw2rlha2RnO0ocV4PiyjjNnLKaWyY4U4xR0TLX6lZJQRWAaqnkp-jVols3-j5DLv3os4VQ_UOcc88ElS1XhOmKvvwHvYxzqn6PlCBMCkVJpV4vlE31NAlcv0_1AunQU9Ifo-prVP3vqCr74l5x3o4w_CX_ZFOB8wW49gEO_1fq15vPi-Qv5Z6hDg</recordid><startdate>202009</startdate><enddate>202009</enddate><creator>Dini, Caroline</creator><creator>Nagay, Bruna Egumi</creator><creator>Magno, Marcela Baraúna</creator><creator>Maia, Lucianne Cople</creator><creator>Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3618-190X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6391-9917</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202009</creationdate><title>Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><author>Dini, Caroline ; Nagay, Bruna Egumi ; Magno, Marcela Baraúna ; Maia, Lucianne Cople ; Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4897-e4a78750319fdba59c910f36d636af72f6c73c24326221482f87865416ee68153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Animal models</topic><topic>Animal research</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Bone implants</topic><topic>Bone strength</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Dental Implants</topic><topic>Dental materials</topic><topic>Dental prosthetics</topic><topic>Dogs</topic><topic>Healing</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>In vivo methods and tests</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Models, Animal</topic><topic>Osseointegration</topic><topic>photofunctionalization</topic><topic>Rabbits</topic><topic>Rats</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surface Properties</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Titanium</topic><topic>ultraviolet rays</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dini, Caroline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nagay, Bruna Egumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magno, Marcela Baraúna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maia, Lucianne Cople</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dini, Caroline</au><au>Nagay, Bruna Egumi</au><au>Magno, Marcela Baraúna</au><au>Maia, Lucianne Cople</au><au>Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral implants research</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Implants Res</addtitle><date>2020-09</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>785</spage><epage>802</epage><pages>785-802</pages><issn>0905-7161</issn><eissn>1600-0501</eissn><abstract>Objectives
To determine whether photofunctionalization influences dental implant osseointegration.
Material and methods
Data on osseointegration rates were extracted from 8 databases, based on bone‐to‐implant contact (BIC) and pushout tests. Internal validity was accessed through the SYRCLE risk of bias tool for animal experimental studies. Meta‐analyses were performed for investigation of the influence of photofunctionalization on implant osseointegration, with a random effect and a confidence interval of 95%. The certainty of evidence was accessed through the GRADE approach.
Results
Thirty‐four records were identified, and 10 were included in the meta‐analysis. Photofunctionalized implants showed higher mean values for BIC in rabbits (MD 6.92 [1.01, 12.82], p = .02), dogs (MD 23.70 [10.23, 37.16], p = .001), rats (MD 20.93 [12.91, 28.95], p < .0001), and in the pooled BIC analyses (MD 14.23 [7.80, 20.66], p < .0001) compared to those in control implants in the overall assay. Conversely, at late healing periods, the pooled BIC meta‐analyses showed no statistically significant differences (p > .05) for photofunctionalized and control implants at 12 weeks of follow‐up. For pushout analysis, photofunctionalized implants presented greater bone strength integration (MD 19.92 [13.88, 25.96], p < .0001) compared to that of control implants. The heterogeneity between studies ranged from “not important” to “moderate” for rabbits I2 = 24%, dogs I2 = 0%, rats I2 = 0%, and pooled BIC (I2 = 49%), while considerable heterogeneity was observed for pushouts (I2 = 90%).
Conclusion
Photofunctionalization improves osseointegration in the initial healing period of implants, as summarized from available data from rabbit, dog, and rat in vivo models.</abstract><cop>Denmark</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>32564392</pmid><doi>10.1111/clr.13627</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3618-190X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6391-9917</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0905-7161 |
| ispartof | Clinical oral implants research, 2020-09, Vol.31 (9), p.785-802 |
| issn | 0905-7161 1600-0501 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2415836027 |
| source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
| subjects | Animal models Animal research Animals Bone implants Bone strength Confidence intervals Dental Implants Dental materials Dental prosthetics Dogs Healing Heterogeneity In vivo methods and tests Meta-analysis Models, Animal Osseointegration photofunctionalization Rabbits Rats Statistical analysis Surface Properties Surgical implants Titanium ultraviolet rays |
| title | Photofunctionalization as a suitable approach to improve the osseointegration of implants in animal models—A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T10%3A38%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Photofunctionalization%20as%20a%20suitable%20approach%20to%20improve%20the%20osseointegration%20of%20implants%20in%20animal%20models%E2%80%94A%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta%E2%80%90analysis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20implants%20research&rft.au=Dini,%20Caroline&rft.date=2020-09&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=785&rft.epage=802&rft.pages=785-802&rft.issn=0905-7161&rft.eissn=1600-0501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/clr.13627&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2440254610%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2440254610&rft_id=info:pmid/32564392&rfr_iscdi=true |