DSpace Repository

Use of Biologic Agents to Promote Bone Formation in Implant Dentistry: A Critical Assessment of Systematic Reviews

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Alarcon, M. A.
dc.contributor.author Diaz, K. T.
dc.contributor.author Aranda, L.
dc.contributor.author Cafferata, E. A.
dc.contributor.author Faggion, C. M.
dc.contributor.author Monje, A.
dc.date.accessioned 2019-01-25T17:02:40Z
dc.date.available 2019-01-25T17:02:40Z
dc.date.issued 2017
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/4974
dc.description.abstract Purpose: The use of biologic agents is emerging in bone regeneration procedures due to their ability to increase cellular events in wound healing and therefore to obtain more predictable outcomes. Hence, the aim of the present study was to critically evaluate the methodology of systematic reviews investigating biologic agents in promoting bone formation and implant site development. Materials and Methods: A literature search for systematic reviews with and without meta-analyses was performed in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane database, as well as in journals with high impact factors in periodontics and implant dentistry. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were analyzed for potential inclusion. Three guidelines-AMSTAR, R-AMSTAR, and the checklist proposed by Glenny et al-were utilized to analyze their methodologic quality. Two calibrated reviewers performed all data extraction and appraisal. Cohen's kappa coefficients were calculated to appraise the interexaminer agreement. Results: A total of 12 systematic reviews, 3 with meta-analyses, were evaluated. Platelet-rich derivatives and BMP-2 were the most widely studied biologic agents and sinus augmentation was the most common procedure evaluated. The R-AMSTAR mean score was 28 (range 14-38) and none of the systematic reviews analyzed met all of the items. In the AMSTAR checklist, the mean score was 5.75 (range 2-9) and the only item met by all the systematic reviews was the a priori design. The Glenny et al checklist mean score was 8.6 (range 4-13) and two items, "focused question" and "to identify all relevant studies," were met by all systematic reviews. Conclusion: Systematic reviews on biologic agents to promote bone formation at implant site development demonstrate substantial methodologic variability. Therefore, caution must be exercised when interpreting their findings. en_US
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher Quintessence Publishing
dc.relation.ispartof urn:issn:1942-4434
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
dc.subject periodontitis en_US
dc.subject evidence-based medicine en_US
dc.subject Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine en_US
dc.subject alveolar bone loss en_US
dc.subject autogenous bone en_US
dc.subject autologous platelet concentrate en_US
dc.subject bias en_US
dc.subject bone regeneration en_US
dc.subject dental implants en_US
dc.subject evidence-based dentistry en_US
dc.subject growth-factors en_US
dc.subject literature review en_US
dc.subject methodological quality en_US
dc.subject quality assessment en_US
dc.subject reconstruction en_US
dc.subject rich plasma en_US
dc.subject sinus floor augmentation en_US
dc.title Use of Biologic Agents to Promote Bone Formation in Implant Dentistry: A Critical Assessment of Systematic Reviews en_US
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/review
dc.identifier.doi https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5101
dc.subject.ocde https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.02.00 es_PE
dc.subject.ocde https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.02.14


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess

Search DSpace


Browse

My Account

Statistics