Comparison of the effectiveness and safety between autologous bone grafts and xenografts for the treatment of alveolar bone defects: Overview of systematic reviews using FRISBEE methodology

Abstract

Introduction: Due to the extensive number of studies developed on periodontal pathologies and the clinical need generated to correct bonvze defects, we have carried out an Overview of systematic reviews using the FRISBEE methodology. Material and Methods: Through this study we expect to bridge the knowledge gap generated regarding the clinical question on the effectiveness of autologous bone substitutes and xenografts in maxillary and mandibular bone defects. Results: For this study, we carried out a systematic search in Epistemonikos and PubMed, we included 3 systematic reviews and 5 primary studies included in these reviews to extract their data. We analyzed data using RevMan 5.4. and GRADEpro. Assessed outcomes included: bone gain [MD 0.06 mm lower (0.26 lower to 0.14 higher)] and bone resorption [MD 0.03 mm higher (0.12 lower to 0.18 higher)], where no significant differences were found between the study groups. The certainty of the evidence was moderate for both outcomes. Bone length and bone density outcomes were not measured or reported in the included studies. Conclusion: We concluded that there are no significant clinical differences between the application of autologous bone grafts and xenografts for bone defects correction for the assessed outcomes, therefore, these biomaterials should be applied at the discretion of the clinician and according to the needs and preferences of patients.

Keywords

• autografts
• heterografts
• allografts
• bone regeneration
• alveolar bone grafting
• periodontal diseases