Efficacy of Enamel Matrix Derivative in Periodontal Regeneration Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

牙釉质基质衍生物在牙周再生缺损中的疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) on periodontal regeneration defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four databases were searched until October 2021. Experimental animal studies evaluating the efficacy of EMD were used. The primary outcomes were bone formation (BF) and cementum formation (CF). The secondary outcomes were junctional epithelium (JE), gingival recession (GR), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Measures of effect were mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Random-effects model were used for all meta-analyses. The Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation tool was used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: Seven experimental animal studies (n = 40) used with a maximum follow-up period of 3 months. Compared to control, EMD did not significantly reduce BF (MD 0.02 mm; 95% CI - 1.91-1.96; I(2) = 89%). However, it increased CF (MD 1.38 mm; 95% CI 0.01-2.74; I(2) = 55%). For secondary outcomes it was found that compared to control, EMD only significantly reduced JE (MD - 0.54 mm; 95% CI - 1.06 to - 0.02; I(2) = 55%). However, the other secondary outcomes were not significant as in the case of GR (MD - 3. 88 mm; 95% CI - 68.29-60.53; I(2) = 82%), and in CAL (MD 0.02 mm; 95% CI - 0.29-0.39; I(2) = 38%). Finally, according to the risk of bias assessment, all included studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: EMD had no effect on BF values while it did not reduce CF. Otherwise, in the secondary outcomes, EMD only significantly reduced JE values and had no effect on GR and CAL.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。