Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review
Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before impla...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical medicine 2022-10, Vol.11 (21), p.6347 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 21 |
container_start_page | 6347 |
container_title | Journal of clinical medicine |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Isola, Gaetano Nucera, Riccardo Damonte, Silvia Ugolini, Alessandro De Mari, Anna Migliorati, Marco |
description | Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/jcm11216347 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9655824</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2734630358</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-392af56a60072b8f4aefd2254875f1250223cc18b2c4081c423ee7d04e8c6df53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkttq3DAQhk1paUKSq76AoDeFdhsdLFmbi8KyzQkCgWx6bbTyyNZiS64kb7svlOeMthtK2rnRwHzzoR-mKD4Q_JWxOT7f6IEQSgQrqzfFMcVVNcNMsrev-qPiLMYNziVlSUn1vjhiggnKK35cPN0OY69cQiubAC075VqIyDr02AUA9N0aAwHyfNlbZ7Xq0WIcg1e6g3iB7kPqfONdshpd_k5hita7L-gBWnAQVLJbQKsptBB2SLkGrcbMKgd-iugGVFa2SJkE4c-20imvX6AFWu1igkHttQ-wtfDrtHhnVB_h7OU9KX5cXT4ub2Z399e3y8XdTDMp0ozNqTJcKIFxRdfSlApMQykvZcUNoRxTyrQmck11iSXRJWUAVYNLkFo0hrOT4tvBO07rARqdkwfV12Owgwq72itb_ztxtqtbv63ngnNJyyz49CII_ucEMdWDjRr6_pC6phXjUswlwxn9-B-68VNwOd6eKkVGuMzU5wOlg48xgPn7GYLr_QnUr06APQOy6KVa</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2734630358</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Isola, Gaetano ; Nucera, Riccardo ; Damonte, Silvia ; Ugolini, Alessandro ; De Mari, Anna ; Migliorati, Marco</creator><creatorcontrib>Isola, Gaetano ; Nucera, Riccardo ; Damonte, Silvia ; Ugolini, Alessandro ; De Mari, Anna ; Migliorati, Marco</creatorcontrib><description>Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2077-0383</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216347</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36362575</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Clinical medicine ; Fractures ; Morbidity ; Orthodontics ; Review ; Surgery ; Surgical techniques ; Systematic review ; Teeth ; Tissue engineering ; Transplants & implants</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical medicine, 2022-10, Vol.11 (21), p.6347</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 by the authors. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-392af56a60072b8f4aefd2254875f1250223cc18b2c4081c423ee7d04e8c6df53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-392af56a60072b8f4aefd2254875f1250223cc18b2c4081c423ee7d04e8c6df53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2062-6014 ; 0000-0001-8671-3025 ; 0000-0003-4267-6992</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9655824/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9655824/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Isola, Gaetano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nucera, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damonte, Silvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ugolini, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Mari, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Migliorati, Marco</creatorcontrib><title>Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review</title><title>Journal of clinical medicine</title><description>Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue.</description><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Orthodontics</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical techniques</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Teeth</subject><subject>Tissue engineering</subject><subject>Transplants & implants</subject><issn>2077-0383</issn><issn>2077-0383</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkttq3DAQhk1paUKSq76AoDeFdhsdLFmbi8KyzQkCgWx6bbTyyNZiS64kb7svlOeMthtK2rnRwHzzoR-mKD4Q_JWxOT7f6IEQSgQrqzfFMcVVNcNMsrev-qPiLMYNziVlSUn1vjhiggnKK35cPN0OY69cQiubAC075VqIyDr02AUA9N0aAwHyfNlbZ7Xq0WIcg1e6g3iB7kPqfONdshpd_k5hita7L-gBWnAQVLJbQKsptBB2SLkGrcbMKgd-iugGVFa2SJkE4c-20imvX6AFWu1igkHttQ-wtfDrtHhnVB_h7OU9KX5cXT4ub2Z399e3y8XdTDMp0ozNqTJcKIFxRdfSlApMQykvZcUNoRxTyrQmck11iSXRJWUAVYNLkFo0hrOT4tvBO07rARqdkwfV12Owgwq72itb_ztxtqtbv63ngnNJyyz49CII_ucEMdWDjRr6_pC6phXjUswlwxn9-B-68VNwOd6eKkVGuMzU5wOlg48xgPn7GYLr_QnUr06APQOy6KVa</recordid><startdate>20221027</startdate><enddate>20221027</enddate><creator>Isola, Gaetano</creator><creator>Nucera, Riccardo</creator><creator>Damonte, Silvia</creator><creator>Ugolini, Alessandro</creator><creator>De Mari, Anna</creator><creator>Migliorati, Marco</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2062-6014</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8671-3025</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4267-6992</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221027</creationdate><title>Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review</title><author>Isola, Gaetano ; Nucera, Riccardo ; Damonte, Silvia ; Ugolini, Alessandro ; De Mari, Anna ; Migliorati, Marco</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-392af56a60072b8f4aefd2254875f1250223cc18b2c4081c423ee7d04e8c6df53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Orthodontics</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical techniques</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Teeth</topic><topic>Tissue engineering</topic><topic>Transplants & implants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Isola, Gaetano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nucera, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Damonte, Silvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ugolini, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Mari, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Migliorati, Marco</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Proquest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Isola, Gaetano</au><au>Nucera, Riccardo</au><au>Damonte, Silvia</au><au>Ugolini, Alessandro</au><au>De Mari, Anna</au><au>Migliorati, Marco</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical medicine</jtitle><date>2022-10-27</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>21</issue><spage>6347</spage><pages>6347-</pages><issn>2077-0383</issn><eissn>2077-0383</eissn><abstract>Both surgical and non-surgical techniques are employed for implant site development. However, the efficacy of these methods has not been thoroughly evaluated and compared. This systematic review aims to compare the biologic, functional and esthetic outcomes of three different approaches before implant placement in both the maxillary and mandibular arches: orthodontic extrusion, regenerative surgery and spontaneous healing after extraction. The systematic research of articles was conducted up to January 2020 in Medline, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies were selected in a three-stage process according to the title, the abstract and the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated using ROBINS-I tools for non-randomized studies, Rob 2.0 for RCT. Quality evaluation of case reports was performed using CARE guidelines. Through the digital search, 1607 articles were identified, and 25 of them were included in the systematic review. The qualitative evaluation showed a good methodological quality for RCT, sufficient for non-randomized studies and poor for case reports. Based on the available results, both orthodontic extrusion and regenerative surgery allowed the development of the implant site with satisfying esthetic and functional outcomes. Studies about the spontaneous healing of the extraction socket showed resorption of the edentulous ridge, which complicated the implant insertion. No study referred to failures or severe complications. Most of the studies reported only qualitative results. The present systematic review demonstrated that there is a substantial lack of data and evidence to determine which of the presented methods is better for developing a future implant site. Both surgical and non-surgical procedures appear effective in the regeneration of hard tissue, whereas not all the techniques can improve soft tissue volume, too. The orthodontic technique simultaneously enhances both hard and soft tissue.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>36362575</pmid><doi>10.3390/jcm11216347</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2062-6014</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8671-3025</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4267-6992</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2077-0383 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical medicine, 2022-10, Vol.11 (21), p.6347 |
issn | 2077-0383 2077-0383 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9655824 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; PubMed Central |
subjects | Clinical medicine Fractures Morbidity Orthodontics Review Surgery Surgical techniques Systematic review Teeth Tissue engineering Transplants & implants |
title | Implant Site Changes in Three Different Clinical Approaches: Orthodontic Extrusion, Regenerative Surgery and Spontaneous Healing after Extraction: A Systematic Review |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T23%3A50%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Implant%20Site%20Changes%20in%20Three%20Different%20Clinical%20Approaches:%20Orthodontic%20Extrusion,%20Regenerative%20Surgery%20and%20Spontaneous%20Healing%20after%20Extraction:%20A%20Systematic%20Review&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20medicine&rft.au=Isola,%20Gaetano&rft.date=2022-10-27&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=21&rft.spage=6347&rft.pages=6347-&rft.issn=2077-0383&rft.eissn=2077-0383&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/jcm11216347&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2734630358%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2734630358&rft_id=info:pmid/36362575&rfr_iscdi=true |