帐篷技术用于牙槽嵴增量的Meta分析

Meta-analysis of tenting technique for alveolar ridge augmentation

目的通过Meta分析方法系统评估牙槽嵴缺损时使用帐篷技术进行骨增量的有效性。方法电子检索2002年4月1日至2022年10月10日PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Cochrane Library、CNKI、万方、SinoMed数据库有关牙槽嵴增量使用帐篷技术和常规骨增量技术的对照研究。结果共纳入9篇研究,其中7篇研究有关水平骨增量,2篇研究有关垂直骨增量。Meta分析结果显示,帐篷技术与引导骨再生在水平骨增量[MD=0.89,95%CI(-0.07,1.85),P=0.07]和术后并发症[RR=3.90,95%CI(0.85,17.96),P=0.08]上表现相似。帐篷技术与引导骨再生和Onlay植骨相比有更少的骨吸收[MD=-3.98,95%CI(-6.32,-1.65),P=0.0008],较Onlay植骨可获得更多的垂直骨增量[MD=1.09,95%CI(0.38,1.81),P=0.003],但在种植体植入率上表现相似。结论有限证据表明,在牙槽嵴增量中帐篷技术可获得与引导骨再生或Onlay植骨类似或略佳的骨增量效果且骨吸收率更低,可作为扩增牙槽嵴轮廓的替代方案。

Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy of applying the tent technique(TT)in alveolar ridge augmentation.Methods The PubMed,Embase,Scopus,Cochrane Library,CNKI,Wanfang,and SinoMed databases were electronically searched from April 1,2002 to October 10,2022 to identify clinical trials that employed TT in alveolar ridge augmentation.Results A total of 9 studies were included,of which 7 referred to horizontal ridge augmentation and 2 referred to vertical ridge augmentation.Meta-analysis indicated that TT had similar performance in horizontal ridge augmentation[MD=0.89,95%CI(-0.07,1.85),P=0.07]and postoperative complications compared with guided bone regeneration(GBR)[RR=3.90,95%CI(0.85,17.96),P=0.08].Furthermore,TT had significantly less bone resorption than GBR and Onlay graft[MD=-3.98,95%CI(-6.32,-1.65),P=0.0008],which could obtain more vertical ridge augmentation than the latter[MD=1.09,95%CI(0.38,1.81),P=0.003].In terms of implant placement rate,their performance was as expected.Conclusion TT,as an alternative technique for alveolar ridge augmentation,achieves similar or better bone incremental performance than GBR or Onlay graft.