Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34669038›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2022

Soft tissue dimensional changes after alveolar ridge preservation using different sealing materials: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Luigi Canullo, Paolo Pesce, Donato Antonacci, Andrea Ravidà, Matthew Galli, Shahnawaz Khijmatgar, Grazia Tommasato, Anton Sculean, Massimo Del Fabbro

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. [Evaluation of the clinical effect of concentrated growth factor combined with sticky bone in maxillary anterior alveolar ridge preservation].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Bone Regeneration: Overview and Future Trends.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Article
  17. Tooth as graft material: Histologic study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2022
    Article
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

9 authors.

Luigi CanulloDepartment of Periodontology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. luigicanullo@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9875-2929
Paolo PesceDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Donato AntonacciPrivate Practice, Bari, Italy.
Andrea RavidàDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Matthew GalliDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Shahnawaz KhijmatgarDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Grazia TommasatoDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Anton SculeanDepartment of Periodontology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Massimo Del FabbroDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlveolar ridge preservation (ARP) is a proactive treatment option aiming at attenuating post-extraction hard and soft tissue dimensional changes. A high number of different types of biomaterials have been utilized during ARP to seal the socket, but their effectiveness in terms of soft tissue outcomes has rarely been investigated and compared in the literature.

objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of different types of membranes and graft materials in terms of soft tissue outcomes (keratinized tissue width changes, vertical buccal height, and horizontal changes) after ARP, and to assign relative rankings based on their performance. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe manuscript represents the proceedings of a consensus conference of the Italian Society of Osseointegration (IAO). PUBMED (Medline), SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist were utilized to conduct the search up to 06 April 2021. English language restrictions were placed and no limitations were set on publication date. Randomized controlled trials that report ARP procedures using different sealing materials, assessing soft tissue as a primary or secondary outcome, with at least 6-week follow-up were included. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using mean, standard deviation, sample size, bias, and follow-up duration for all included studies. Network geometry, contribution plots, inconsistency plots, predictive and confidence interval plots, SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) rankings, and multidimensional (MDS) ranking plots were constructed.

resultsA total of 11 studies were included for NMA. Overall, the level of bias for included studies was moderate. Crosslinked collagen membranes (SUCRA rank 81.8%) performed best in vertical buccal height (VBH), autogenous soft tissue grafts (SUCRA rank 89.1%) in horizontal width change (HWch), and control (SUCRA rank 85.8%) in keratinized mucosa thickness (KMT).

conclusionsNMA confirmed that the use of crosslinked collagen membranes and autogenous soft tissue grafts represented the best choices for sealing sockets during ARP in terms of minimizing post-extraction soft tissue dimensional shrinkage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Grafting materials demonstrated statistically significantly better performances in terms of soft tissue thickness and vertical buccal height changes, when covered with crosslinked collagen membranes. Instead, soft tissue grafts performed better in horizontal width changes. Non-crosslinked membranes and other materials or combinations presented slightly inferior outcomes.

Indexed as

Alveolar Bone LossAlveolar Ridge AugmentationAlveolar ProcessBiocompatible MaterialsCollagenHumansTooth ExtractionTooth SocketBiocompatible MaterialsCollagenAlveolar ridge preservationCollagen membraneCollagen spongeCrosslinkedMultidimensional scaleNetwork meta-analysisNon-crosslinkedPredictive intervalRankingSoft tissueSUCRA

Identifiers

PMID34669038
PMCPMC8791918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.