What do systematic reviews say?

6 questions · 6 findings · 4 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 1 · 16.7%GRADE not reported 5 · 83.3%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Erbium:YAG laser vs Air-abrasive device (Perio-Flow)

Marginal bone level change · People with at least one dental implant affected by perimplantitis

Er:YAG laser showed no clear difference in radiographic marginal bone level change compared with air-abrasive device (Perio-Flow); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
After 6 months no statistically significant difference for peri-implant marginal bone levels.
1 study · 42 participants
GRADE not reported

Hyperbaric oxygen vs No HBO therapy

Marginal bone level change · Patients who have had radiotherapy and who have missing teeth that require replacement with osseointegrated dental implants

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: hyperbaric oxygen therapy for irradiated patients who require dental implants 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
Radiographic bone level changes (but not used since extrapolated from oblique lateral radiographs).
1 study
GRADE not reported

1-stage (non-submerged) implant placement vs 2-stage (submerged) implant placement

Marginal bone level change · People with dental implants

1-stage (non-submerged) implant placement showed no clear difference in radiographic marginal bone level changes compared with 2-stage (submerged) implant placement; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: 1- versus 2-stage implant placement 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 to 12 months after loading
MD -0.10 [-0.40, 0.20]
1 study · 29 participants
GRADE not reported

Enamel matrix derivative (EMD; Emdogain) vs placebo or control

Marginal bone level change · Patients affected by chronic, aggressive, or early onset periodontitis, with intrabony defects having an intrabony component of at least 3…

1 finding from 1 review

Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain®) for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
1 year (time-points 1, 5 and 10 years planned)
No statistically significant difference between EMD and control for radiographic bone gain (three trials; P effect = 0.27, I2 = 78%).
3 studies
GRADE not reported

Enamel matrix derivative (EMD; Emdogain) vs Various bone grafting (BG) procedures (animal-derived or synthetic bone / bioactive ceramic filler)

Marginal bone level change · Patients affected by chronic, aggressive, or early onset periodontitis, with intrabony defects having an intrabony component of at least 3…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain®) for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
1 year (time-points 1, 5 and 10 years planned)
Radiographic bone level: no trial evaluated this.
0 studies
No studies found

Enamel matrix derivative (EMD; Emdogain) vs Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) with barriers

Marginal bone level change · Patients affected by chronic, aggressive, or early onset periodontitis, with intrabony defects having an intrabony component of at least 3…

1 finding from 1 review

Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain®) for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
1 year (time-points 1, 5 and 10 years planned)
No statistically significant differences (one trial).
1 study
GRADE not reported