Major clinical findings of bone regeneration in implant dentistry: a systematic review
Introduction: Over the past three decades, the number of dental implant procedures has been around one million dental implants per year. The development of biomaterials for use in clinical dentistry is a powerful therapeutic instrument in the correction of bone defects. Objective: It was to carry ou...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2023 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Faculdade de Medicina em São José do Rio Preto (Faceres) |
| Repositorio: | MedNEXT Journal of Medical and Health Sciences |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs2.mednext.zotarellifilhoscientificworks.com:article/314 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://mednext.zotarellifilhoscientificworks.com/index.php/mednext/article/view/314 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Bone regeneration Biomaterials Dental implants Implant dentistry |
| Sumario: | Introduction: Over the past three decades, the number of dental implant procedures has been around one million dental implants per year. The development of biomaterials for use in clinical dentistry is a powerful therapeutic instrument in the correction of bone defects. Objective: It was to carry out a concise systematic review of bone regeneration processes using biomaterials and the main molecular and cellular constituents for implant dentistry. Methods: The survey was carried out from May to July 2023 in the Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, and Scielo databases, using older scientific articles with a gold standard reference up to 2023. The quality of the studies was based on the GRADE instrument and the risk of bias by the Cochrane instrument. Results and Conclusion: It was found 162 studies that underwent eligibility analysis. The final sample had 31 eligible studies that were described in the systematic review. Most studies showed homogeneity in their results, with I2 =24.9% <25%. Due to bone regeneration and biological barriers in graft surgeries, there has been a technological growth of these materials as they point to potential tools for treating bone loss. The greater potential of guided bone regeneration was associated with the graft material due to the higher grade of vital bone and the lower percentage of residual graft particles. All studied bone substitute materials resulted in efficient bone formation for dental implants and alveolar ridge preservation procedures. It was concluded that bioengineering and cell therapy work together for regenerative dentistry, favoring and improving biological conditions to accelerate tissue repair and regeneration and, thus, naturally maintaining tissue homeostasis. This condition is maintained because the required cellular elements are provided, the cell proliferation and differentiation factors, and supramolecular structures that guarantee the functional stereochemical organization of the generated tissues and their systemic integration. |
|---|