Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33959236›Full record

ReviewJournal of oral & maxillofacial research

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation with Autogenous Bone Graft Compared with a Composite Grafting Material or Bone Substitute Alone: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Assessing Volumetric Stability of the Grafting Material.

Thomas Starch-Jensen, Daniel Deluiz, Julie Vitenson, Niels Henrik Bruun, Eduardo Muniz Barretto Tinoco

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of oral & maxillofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05403112 (Simultaneous Implant Placement With Autogenous Bone Ring Transplant vs Autologous Sticky Bone Graft in Maxillary Sinus Lifting " Randomization Clinical Trial"), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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.

NCT05403112 naunknown statusnot on this map

Simultaneous Implant Placement With Autogenous Bone Ring Transplant vs Autologous Sticky Bone Graft in Maxillary Sinus Lifting " Randomization Clinical Trial"

TypeinterventionalSponsorOmar Saleh Ahmed BassedRan2022 to 2023Enrolled26ConditionsBone GraftArmsBone ring with open sinus lifting
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas Starch-JensenDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Aalborg University Hospital, AalborgDenmark.
Daniel DeluizDepartment of Periodontology, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de JaneiroBrazil.
Julie VitensonDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Aalborg University Hospital, AalborgDenmark.
Niels Henrik BruunUnit of Clinical Biostatistics, Aalborg University Hospital, AalborgDenmark.
Eduardo Muniz Barretto TinocoDepartment of Periodontology, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de JaneiroBrazil.
Aalborg University Hospital · DKUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTest the hypothesis of no difference in the volumetric stability of the grafting material following maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft compared with composite grafting material or bone substitute alone applying the lateral window technique. MATERIAL AND

methodsMEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library and hand-search of relevant journals were conducted. Human studies published in English until the 9

resultsElectronic search and hand-searching resulted in 102 entries. Four randomized controlled trials with unclear risk of bias fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The volumetric stability of the grafting material was significantly improved by mixing autogenous bone graft with a non-resorbable xenograft compared with autogenous bone graft. Meta-analyses assessing absolute and relative volumetric changes demonstrated no significant differences between autogenous bone graft compared with allogeneic bone graft, synthetic biomaterials combined with autogenous bone graft or used alone. Association between volumetric changes of the grafting material and potential predictive parameters were not assessed in the included studies.

conclusionsVolumetric reduction of the augmented area seems inevitable following maxillary sinus floor augmentation regardless of the grafting material. The volumetric stability of autogenous bone graft is improved with addition of xenograft compared with autogenous bone graft. However, conclusions drawn from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution since only four studies using three-dimensional radiographic measurements were included.

Indexed as

alveolar ridge augmentationdental implantsoral surgical proceduresreviewsinus floor augmentation

Identifiers

PMID33959236
PMCPMC8085675
OpenAlexW3147920442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.