Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32052179›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2020

Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) treatments of periodontal intra-bony defect. A systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCT's.

Luigi Barbato, Filippo Selvaggi, Zamira Kalemaj, Jacopo Buti, Elena Bendinelli, Michele La Marca, Francesco Cairo

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Clinical evaluation of Laser-Assisted New Attachment ProcedureJournal of periodontal & implant science · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Luigi BarbatoResearch Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. luigi.barbato1985@libero.it.
Filippo SelvaggiResearch Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Zamira KalemajPrivate Practice, Milan, Italy.
Jacopo ButiUnit of Periodontology, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK.
Elena BendinelliResearch Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Michele La MarcaResearch Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Francesco CairoResearch Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to explore the efficacy of different minimal invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) approaches for the treatment of intra-bony defect in terms of clinical attachment level (CAL) gain and periodontal pocket depth (PPD) reduction.

methodsA detailed review protocol was designed according to PRISMA guideline. Online search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing MIS or MINST procedure, with or without the application of a regenerative tool for the treatment of intra-bony defect, were included. Cochrane checklist for risk of bias assessment was used. Network meta-Analysis (NMAs) was used to rank the treatment efficacy.

resultsNine RCTs accounting for 244 patients and a total of 244 defects were included. Only two studies were at low risk of bias. CAL gain for included treatment ranged from 2.58 ± 1.13 mm to 4.7 ± 2.5 mm while PPD reduction ranged from 3.19 ± 0.71 mm to 5.3 ± 1.5 mm. On the basis of the ranking curve, MINST showed the lowest probability to be the best treatment option for CAL gain. Pairwise comparisons and treatment rankings suggest superiority for regenerative approaches (CAL difference 0.78 mm, (0.14-1.41); P < 0.05) and surgical treatment elevating only the buccal or palatal flap (CAL difference: 0.95 mm, (0.33-1.57); P < 0.05).

conclusionsMinimally invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) periodontal therapy show promising results in the treatment of residual pocket with intra-bony defect. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MIS procedures represent a reliable treatment for isolated intra-bony defect.

Indexed as

Minimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresOral Surgical ProceduresAlveolar Bone LossHumansPeriodontal PocketRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeGuided tissue regenerationMinimally invasive surgical proceduresPeriodontal pocketPeriodontitis

Identifiers

PMID32052179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.