Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone versus autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review
Identifieur interne : 000446 ( Pmc/Curation ); précédent : 000445; suivant : 000447Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone versus autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review
Auteurs : Fabrizio Carini [Italie] ; Salvatore Longoni [Italie] ; Ernesto Amosso [Italie] ; Jacopo Paleari [Italie] ; Stefania Carini [Italie] ; Gianluca Porcaro [Italie]Source :
- Annali di Stomatologia [ 1824-0852 ] ; 2014.
Abstract
Reconstruction of segmental defects and the atrophic maxilla and mandible is performed using various techniques. Bone substitutes have received a wealth of reports in the literature demonstrating a long-term success when used in alveolar bone augmentation procedures.
We reviewed articles comparing TiMesh GBR technique with different percentage of bone: autogenous bone alone (AB); anorganic bovine bone alone (ABB); 50:50 or 70:30. From an initial pool of 122, we selected 14 studies. ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test was used for statistical analysis.
We present a table analysing fundamental parameters to value a successful GBR therapy. Autogenous bone remains the gold standard in GBR technique with TiMesh; however, the combination between AB/ABB in relation 50:50 and 70:30 allows reducing surgical cost exploiting properties of eterologous bone.
The use of autologous bone is associated with a height and width gain of bone, which are greater compared to other techniques, with a lower exposure of the mesh and a lower bone resorption. The use of heterologous graft leads to a lower bone earn and to percentage of resorption greater than autologous graft but does not differ from the gain and resorption of the bone of AB/ABB in percentage 50:50 and 70:30.
Url:
PubMed: 25678948
PubMed Central: 4308965
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Pmc, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :000446
Links to Exploration step
PMC:4308965Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone <italic>versus</italic> autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review</title><author><name sortKey="Carini, Fabrizio" sort="Carini, Fabrizio" uniqKey="Carini F" first="Fabrizio" last="Carini">Fabrizio Carini</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Longoni, Salvatore" sort="Longoni, Salvatore" uniqKey="Longoni S" first="Salvatore" last="Longoni">Salvatore Longoni</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Amosso, Ernesto" sort="Amosso, Ernesto" uniqKey="Amosso E" first="Ernesto" last="Amosso">Ernesto Amosso</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Paleari, Jacopo" sort="Paleari, Jacopo" uniqKey="Paleari J" first="Jacopo" last="Paleari">Jacopo Paleari</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Carini, Stefania" sort="Carini, Stefania" uniqKey="Carini S" first="Stefania" last="Carini">Stefania Carini</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af2-27-36">School of Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Porcaro, Gianluca" sort="Porcaro, Gianluca" uniqKey="Porcaro G" first="Gianluca" last="Porcaro">Gianluca Porcaro</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno><idno type="pmid">25678948</idno><idno type="pmc">4308965</idno><idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4308965</idno><idno type="RBID">PMC:4308965</idno><date when="2014">2014</date><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">000446</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">000446</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Curation">000446</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Curation">000446</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone <italic>versus</italic> autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review</title><author><name sortKey="Carini, Fabrizio" sort="Carini, Fabrizio" uniqKey="Carini F" first="Fabrizio" last="Carini">Fabrizio Carini</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Longoni, Salvatore" sort="Longoni, Salvatore" uniqKey="Longoni S" first="Salvatore" last="Longoni">Salvatore Longoni</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Amosso, Ernesto" sort="Amosso, Ernesto" uniqKey="Amosso E" first="Ernesto" last="Amosso">Ernesto Amosso</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Paleari, Jacopo" sort="Paleari, Jacopo" uniqKey="Paleari J" first="Jacopo" last="Paleari">Jacopo Paleari</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Carini, Stefania" sort="Carini, Stefania" uniqKey="Carini S" first="Stefania" last="Carini">Stefania Carini</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af2-27-36">School of Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Porcaro, Gianluca" sort="Porcaro, Gianluca" uniqKey="Porcaro G" first="Gianluca" last="Porcaro">Gianluca Porcaro</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:aff id="af1-27-36">Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</nlm:aff><country xml:lang="fr">Italie</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Annali di Stomatologia</title><idno type="ISSN">1824-0852</idno><idno type="eISSN">1971-1441</idno><imprint><date when="2014">2014</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><title>Summary</title><sec><title>Aim of the study</title><p>Reconstruction of segmental defects and the atrophic maxilla and mandible is performed using various techniques. Bone substitutes have received a wealth of reports in the literature demonstrating a long-term success when used in alveolar bone augmentation procedures.</p></sec><sec><title>Materials and methods</title><p>We reviewed articles comparing TiMesh GBR technique with different percentage of bone: autogenous bone alone (AB); anorganic bovine bone alone (ABB); 50:50 or 70:30. From an initial pool of 122, we selected 14 studies. ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test was used for statistical analysis.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>We present a table analysing fundamental parameters to value a successful GBR therapy. Autogenous bone remains the gold standard in GBR technique with TiMesh; however, the combination between AB/ABB in relation 50:50 and 70:30 allows reducing surgical cost exploiting properties of eterologous bone.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>The use of autologous bone is associated with a height and width gain of bone, which are greater compared to other techniques, with a lower exposure of the mesh and a lower bone resorption. The use of heterologous graft leads to a lower bone earn and to percentage of resorption greater than autologous graft but does not differ from the gain and resorption of the bone of AB/ABB in percentage 50:50 and 70:30.</p></sec></div></front></TEI><pmc article-type="review-article"><pmc-comment>The publisher of this article does not allow downloading of the full text in XML form.</pmc-comment>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Ann Stomatol (Roma)</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Ann Stomatol (Roma)</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Annali_Stomatologia</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Annali di Stomatologia</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1824-0852</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1971-1441</issn><publisher><publisher-name>CIC Edizioni Internationali</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">25678948</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">4308965</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">27-36</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Review Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone <italic>versus</italic> autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Carini</surname><given-names>Fabrizio</given-names></name><degrees>MD, DDS</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af1-27-36">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Longoni</surname><given-names>Salvatore</given-names></name><degrees>MD, DMD, DDS</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af1-27-36">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Amosso</surname><given-names>Ernesto</given-names></name><degrees>DMD</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af1-27-36">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Paleari</surname><given-names>Jacopo</given-names></name><degrees>DMD, DDS</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af1-27-36">1</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Carini</surname><given-names>Stefania</given-names></name><degrees>MS-6</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af2-27-36">2</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Porcaro</surname><given-names>Gianluca</given-names></name><degrees>DMD, DDS</degrees><xref ref-type="aff" rid="af1-27-36">1</xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c1-27-36"></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="af1-27-36"><label>1</label>Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</aff><aff id="af2-27-36"><label>2</label>School of Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy</aff><author-notes><corresp id="c1-27-36">Corresponding author: Gianluca Porcaro, School of Oral Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, via Pergolesi 33, 20900 Monza, Italy, E-mail: <email>gianluca.porcaro@unimib.it</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="collection"><season>Apr-Jun</season><year>2014</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>25</day><month>10</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>5</volume><issue>No 2 Suppl to No 2</issue><fpage>27</fpage><lpage>36</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>©2014 CIC Edizioni Internazionali, Rome, Italy</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year></permissions><abstract><title>Summary</title><sec><title>Aim of the study</title><p>Reconstruction of segmental defects and the atrophic maxilla and mandible is performed using various techniques. Bone substitutes have received a wealth of reports in the literature demonstrating a long-term success when used in alveolar bone augmentation procedures.</p></sec><sec><title>Materials and methods</title><p>We reviewed articles comparing TiMesh GBR technique with different percentage of bone: autogenous bone alone (AB); anorganic bovine bone alone (ABB); 50:50 or 70:30. From an initial pool of 122, we selected 14 studies. ANOVA followed by Tukey HSD test was used for statistical analysis.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>We present a table analysing fundamental parameters to value a successful GBR therapy. Autogenous bone remains the gold standard in GBR technique with TiMesh; however, the combination between AB/ABB in relation 50:50 and 70:30 allows reducing surgical cost exploiting properties of eterologous bone.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>The use of autologous bone is associated with a height and width gain of bone, which are greater compared to other techniques, with a lower exposure of the mesh and a lower bone resorption. The use of heterologous graft leads to a lower bone earn and to percentage of resorption greater than autologous graft but does not differ from the gain and resorption of the bone of AB/ABB in percentage 50:50 and 70:30.</p></sec></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>GBR technique</kwd><kwd>TiMesh</kwd><kwd>alveolar ridge augmentation</kwd><kwd>anorganic bovine bone</kwd><kwd>bone substitute</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></pmc></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Pmc/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000446 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 000446 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Pmc
|étape= Curation
|type= RBID
|clé= PMC:4308965
|texte= Bone augmentation with TiMesh. autologous bone versus autologous bone and bone substitutes. A systematic review
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Curation/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:25678948" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Curation/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |