We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Regeneration of alveolar bone defects in the experimental pig model: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Oral Implants Research 2024 March 8
OBJECTIVE: Pigs are emerging as a preferred experimental in vivo model for bone regeneration. The study objective was to answer the focused PEO question: in the pig model (P), what is the capacity of experimental alveolar bone defects (E) for spontaneous regeneration in terms of new bone formation (O)?
METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases were searched for studies reporting experimental bone defects or extraction socket healing in the maxillae or mandibles of pigs. The main inclusion criteria were the presence of a control group of untreated defects/sockets and the assessment of regeneration via 3D tomography [radiographic defect fill (RDF)] or 2D histomorphometry [new bone formation (NBF)]. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for the outcomes RDF and NBF.
RESULTS: Overall, 45 studies were included reporting on alveolar bone defects or extraction sockets, most frequently in the mandibles of minipigs. Based on morphology, defects were broadly classified as 'box-defects' (BD) or 'cylinder-defects' (CD) with a wide range of healing times (10 days to 52 weeks). Meta-analyses revealed pooled estimates (with 95% confidence intervals) of 50% RDF (36.87%-63.15%) and 43.74% NBF (30.47%-57%) in BD, and 44% RDF (16.48%-71.61%) and 39.67% NBF (31.53%-47.81%) in CD, which were similar to estimates of socket-healing [48.74% RDF (40.35%-57.13%) and 38.73% NBF (28.57%-48.89%)]. Heterogeneity in the meta-analysis was high (I2 > 90%).
CONCLUSION: A substantial body of literature revealed a high capacity for spontaneous regeneration in experimental alveolar bone defects of (mini)pigs, which should be considered in future studies of bone regeneration in this animal model.
METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases were searched for studies reporting experimental bone defects or extraction socket healing in the maxillae or mandibles of pigs. The main inclusion criteria were the presence of a control group of untreated defects/sockets and the assessment of regeneration via 3D tomography [radiographic defect fill (RDF)] or 2D histomorphometry [new bone formation (NBF)]. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for the outcomes RDF and NBF.
RESULTS: Overall, 45 studies were included reporting on alveolar bone defects or extraction sockets, most frequently in the mandibles of minipigs. Based on morphology, defects were broadly classified as 'box-defects' (BD) or 'cylinder-defects' (CD) with a wide range of healing times (10 days to 52 weeks). Meta-analyses revealed pooled estimates (with 95% confidence intervals) of 50% RDF (36.87%-63.15%) and 43.74% NBF (30.47%-57%) in BD, and 44% RDF (16.48%-71.61%) and 39.67% NBF (31.53%-47.81%) in CD, which were similar to estimates of socket-healing [48.74% RDF (40.35%-57.13%) and 38.73% NBF (28.57%-48.89%)]. Heterogeneity in the meta-analysis was high (I2 > 90%).
CONCLUSION: A substantial body of literature revealed a high capacity for spontaneous regeneration in experimental alveolar bone defects of (mini)pigs, which should be considered in future studies of bone regeneration in this animal model.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app