Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36683923›Full record

ReviewNational journal of maxillofacial surgery

Sandwich osteotomy with interpositional grafts for vertical augmentation of the mandible: A meta-analysis.

Rathindra Nath Bera, Sapna Tandon, Akhilesh Kumar Singh, Bappaditya Bhattacharjee, Sapna Pandey, Tomin Chirakkattu

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rathindra Nath BeraDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Institute Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India.
Sapna TandonDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Career Post Graduate Institute of Dental Science and Hospital, Lucknow, UP, India.
Akhilesh Kumar SinghFaculty of Dental Sciences, Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Medical Sciences Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP, India.
Bappaditya BhattacharjeeFaculty of Dental Sciences, Unit of Prosthodoontics, Institute of Medical Sciences Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, UP, India.
Sapna PandeyDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Career Post Graduate Institute of Dental Science and Hospital, Lucknow, UP, India.
Tomin ChirakkattuDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Career Post Graduate Institute of Dental Science and Hospital, Lucknow, UP, India.
Career Institute Of Medical & Dental Sciences and Hospital · INRajendra Institute of Medical Sciences · INBanaras Hindu University · INInstitute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sandwich osteotomy is a technique for vertical augmentation based on the principle of a graft being placed between two pedicled native bones. The inherent vascularization helps in graft consolidation. The aim is to review the bone height gained, implant survival and pitfalls with sandwich osteotomy. The PICO model was used to identify the suitable studies for the review. Oxford level of evidence, Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Cochrane's tool for Systematic Reviews of Interventions was applied for identifying study quality. Meta-analysis was performed with the help of RevMan. Funnel plot was used to evaluate publication bias and bias during article selection. Difference in means was used as principal summary measure. Fixed effects model with inverse variance statistics was used. I2test statistics was applied to identify study heterogeneity. Forest plots were produced for the outcome variables with 95% confidence interval (CI) and overall treatment effects and subgroup effects at a significance level of 0.05. The overall implant survival rate ranged from 90%-100% and prosthetic survival rate from 87%-95%. An overall 6-10mm of bone can be gained in the anterior mandible and 4-8mm in the posterior mandible. A total of 1030 implants were placed of which 988 implants survived after the mean follow up periods (odds ratio: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.49-1.21). Implant survival is independent of the graft being used. Vertical augmentation in the posterior mandible is limited compared to anterior owing to the presence of inferior alveolar nerve and the keratinized tissue deficiency.

Indexed as

Augmentationdental implantsjawsmandibleosteotomysandwich

Identifiers

PMID36683923
PMCPMC9851349
OpenAlexW4317780084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.