MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224130512 · doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101731

EFFECT OF AUTOGENOUS BONE GRAFT SITE ON DENTAL IMPLANT SURVIVAL AND DONOR SITE COMPLICATIONS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2022· review· en· W4224130512 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evidence Based Dental Practice · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Health Agency
KeywordsMedicineIliac crestDentistryMeta-analysisImplantDental implantOsseointegrationSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to answer the following focus questions: Is the implant survival in augmented bone utilizing iliac crest bone grafts the same as while using intraoral autologous bone grafts? Is the incidence of postoperative donor site complications the same when using iliac crest bone grafts as opposed to intraoral grafts? METHODS: Systematic searches of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL) were performed to identify studies which reported on implant survival and postoperative complications for dental implants placed in grafted partially/completely edentulous human jaws. Studies were included if: they reported on 2-piece micro-rough surface root form dental implants placed in bone-augmented completely or partially edentulous human jaws, and the jaws must have been augmented with autologous bone graft materials. Time and nature of postoperative complications must have been reported. Two investigators performed data extraction and a Cohen's unweighted kappa was calculated for inter-investigator reliability. A meta-analysis was performed for the extracted data on implant survival rate in both iliac crest grafts and intra-oral grafts. A qualitative analysis was performed on the information extracted on graft donor site complications. Quality assessment of the included studies were done using the Cochrane collaboration tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scales. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies were included in the final analysis. The calculated kappa ranged between 0.77-0.89 for the literature search and identification process. Fourteen studies were included with data on implant survival including five randomized controlled clinical trials. The meta-analysis of included studies revealed that the implant survival rate of dental implants placed in jaws augmented with iliac crest grafts was lower than those placed in jaws augmented with intra-oral bone grafts at 6-months [ICG = 95.8% IOG = 98.4%; P < .001], 12-months [ICG = 97.0%, IOG = 98.4%; P < .001], 24-months [ICG = 85.9%, IOG = 98.2%; P < .001], 60-months [ICG = 90.0%, IOG = 91.5%; P < .001], and at 120-months [ICG = 88.8%, IOG = 95.2%; P < .001] follow-up periods. Iliac crest grafts were also frequently associated with donor site complications including pain / discomfort, gait disturbance, and sensory disturbance. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that implant survival is consistently higher in bone harvested from intraoral sites compared to iliac crest grafts. Donor site complications seemed to be a frequent finding with iliac crest grafts and mental grafts. FUNDING: None. REGISTRATION: The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021283738).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it