Healing complications and their detrimental effects on bone gain in vertical‐guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Guided bone regeneration (GBR) utilizes a barrier membrane to allow osteogenic cells to populate a space by excluding epithelial and connective tissue cells. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the ratio of means (RoM) of vertical bone gained (Outcome) in vertical GBR procedures with healing complications (Intervention) and in vertical GBR procedures without healing complications (Comparison) in patients with vertically resorbed edentulous ridges that require dental implant placement (Population). A further aim was to investigate the incidence of complications after vertical GBR, and the influence of the timing of implant placement and regenerative devices on complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched in duplicate up to, and including, November 2020 for randomized and controlled clinical trials and prospective and retrospective case series. Outcomes included patient-level and site-level RoM of vertical bone gain between healing complications and uneventful healing, and incidences of complications that occurred after vertical GBR. Random-effects and fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021226432). RESULTS: A total of 31 publications were selected for the qualitative and quantitative analyses. The RoM of vertical bone gained was 0.65 [95% CI = 0.47, 0.91] and 0.62 [95% CI = 0.45, 0.85] when membrane exposure without suppuration and abscess formation without membrane exposure occurred respectively, in comparison to uneventful healing. The overall incidence proportion of healing complications occurring at the augmented site at a site- and patient-level was 11.0% [95% CI = 7.0, 15.6] and 10.8% [95% CI = 6.6, 15.7]. At a patient-level, there were no significant differences between a simultaneous or staged approach, or with the regenerative device used. The site-level incidence proportion of membrane exposure without suppuration, membrane exposure with suppuration, and with abscess formation without membrane exposure was 8.7% [95% CI = 4.2, 14.2], 0.7% [95% CI = 0.0, 2.9], and 0.5% [95% CI = 0.0, 1.7], respectively. The site-level weighted mean incidence proportion of neurologic complications occurring at the donor site was 0.8% [95% CI = 0.0, 5.3]. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant reduction in bone gain when healing complications occur. However, healing complications are relatively uncommon surgical complications after vertical GBR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".