Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Margherita Tumedei, Paolo Savadori, Massimo Del Fabbro

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79%, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44%, 95% CI: 0.71, 8.17%, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures.

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences
Volume20
Issue number17
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 28 2019

Fingerprint

osteogenesis
Bone Regeneration
regeneration
Osteogenesis
bones
animal models
Meta-Analysis
Bone
Bone and Bones
Animal Models
rabbits
healing
confidence
bone mineral content
goats
Confidence Intervals
Rabbits
sheep
intervals
Miniature Swine

Keywords

  • animal models
  • biomaterials
  • block graft
  • bone graft
  • bone regeneration
  • bone substitutes
  • histological analysis
  • synthetic biomaterials
  • systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Catalysis
  • Molecular Biology
  • Spectroscopy
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Physical and Theoretical Chemistry
  • Organic Chemistry
  • Inorganic Chemistry

Cite this

Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. / Tumedei, Margherita; Savadori, Paolo; Del Fabbro, Massimo.

In: International Journal of Molecular Sciences, Vol. 20, No. 17, 28.08.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{471dd367172349a5b70264e221309225,
title = "Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis",
abstract = "This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91{\%}, 95{\%} confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79{\%}, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44{\%}, 95{\%} CI: 0.71, 8.17{\%}, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures.",
keywords = "animal models, biomaterials, block graft, bone graft, bone regeneration, bone substitutes, histological analysis, synthetic biomaterials, systematic review",
author = "Margherita Tumedei and Paolo Savadori and {Del Fabbro}, Massimo",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "28",
doi = "10.3390/ijms20174221",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
journal = "International Journal of Molecular Sciences",
issn = "1661-6596",
publisher = "MDPI AG",
number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Synthetic Blocks for Bone Regeneration

T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AU - Tumedei, Margherita

AU - Savadori, Paolo

AU - Del Fabbro, Massimo

PY - 2019/8/28

Y1 - 2019/8/28

N2 - This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79%, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44%, 95% CI: 0.71, 8.17%, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures.

AB - This systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of synthetic block materials for bone augmentation in preclinical in vivo studies. An electronic search was performed on Pubmed, Scopus, EMBASE. Articles selected underwent risk-of-bias assessment. The outcomes were: new bone formation and residual graft with histomorphometry, radiographic bone density, soft tissue parameters, complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare new bone formation in test (synthetic blocks) vs. control group (autogenous blocks or spontaneous healing). The search yielded 214 articles. After screening, 39 studies were included, all performed on animal models: rabbits (n = 18 studies), dogs (n = 4), rats (n = 7), minipigs (n = 4), goats (n = 4), and sheep (n = 2). The meta-analysis on rabbit studies showed significantly higher new bone formation for synthetic blocks with respect to autogenous blocks both at four-week (mean difference (MD): 5.91%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.04, 10.79%, p = 0.02) and at eight-week healing (MD: 4.44%, 95% CI: 0.71, 8.17%, p = 0.02). Other animal models evidenced a trend for better outcomes with synthetic blocks, though only based on qualitative analysis. Synthetic blocks may represent a viable resource in bone regenerative surgery for achieving new bone formation. Differences in the animal models, the design of included studies, and the bone defects treated should be considered when generalizing the results. Clinical studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of synthetic blocks in bone augmentation procedures.

KW - animal models

KW - biomaterials

KW - block graft

KW - bone graft

KW - bone regeneration

KW - bone substitutes

KW - histological analysis

KW - synthetic biomaterials

KW - systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071774973&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071774973&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3390/ijms20174221

DO - 10.3390/ijms20174221

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31466409

AN - SCOPUS:85071774973

VL - 20

JO - International Journal of Molecular Sciences

JF - International Journal of Molecular Sciences

SN - 1661-6596

IS - 17

ER -