Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM41744938
Dentinal Grafts, a Promising Material for Alveolar Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ahamed Syed Kowsar, Cosola Saverio, Alqarni Ali Abdullah, et al. · Dentistry journal · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.3390/dj14020100
Findings
Population Adults requiring tooth extraction and ridge preservation, bone augmentation or immediate implant placement
15 findings
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Implant success rate 4 to 18 months of follow-up | 96.4% vs 94.2%, p>0.05 (comparator not stated in the table); high certainty; Supplementary Table S1 gives I2=60% 94.2% vs 96.4% High 4 studies · 212 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Implant success rate 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Sensitivity analysis excluding Pang 2017 and Yang 2023 | 96.8% vs 94.5%, p>0.05; I2=75% 94.5% vs 96.8% GRADE not reported 4 studies · 212 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Primary implant stability (ISQ) 4 to 18 months of follow-up | MD -0.8 [-3.2, 1.6] High 3 studies · 138 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | New bone formation (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Sensitivity analysis excluding Pang 2017 and Yang 2023 | MD 14.2 [7.5, 20.9] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 149 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Residual graft material (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Sensitivity analysis excluding Pang 2017 and Yang 2023 | MD -9.1 [-12.3, -5.9] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 92 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Primary implant stability (ISQ) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Sensitivity analysis excluding Pang 2017 and Yang 2023 | MD -0.5 [-3.1, 2.1] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 122 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | Residual graft material (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up | MD -8.6 [-11.2, -6.0] Moderate Downgraded: imprecision 3 studies · 109 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Xenograft | New bone formation (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up | MD 12.4 [6.8, 18.0] High 4 studies · 172 participants |
| Completely demineralized dentin graft (DDM) | Xenograft | New bone formation (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Subgroup by dentin processing method: completely demineralized | MD 5.2 [-2.1, 12.5] GRADE not reported 1 study |
| Mineralized dentin graft (MDM) | Xenograft | New bone formation (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Subgroup by dentin processing method: mineralized | MD 12.4 [6.8, 18.0] GRADE not reported 1 study |
| Partially demineralized dentin graft (PDDM) | Xenograft | New bone formation (%) 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Subgroup by dentin processing method: partially demineralized | MD 18.0 [11.2, 24.8] GRADE not reported 2 studies |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Natural socket healing (no graft) | Ridge dimensional change (horizontal bone loss) 4 to 18 months of follow-up | MD -2.3 Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency 2 studies · 64 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Any control (xenograft, natural healing, other dentin preparation) | Complications and adverse events 4 to 18 months of follow-up | RR 1.37 [0.26, 7.21] 1.6% (2/124) vs 2.2% (3/138) Moderate Downgraded: imprecision 8 studies · 249 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Any control (xenograft, natural healing, other dentin preparation) | Complications and adverse events 4 to 18 months of follow-up · Sensitivity analysis excluding Pang 2017 and Yang 2023 | RR 1.15 [0.15, 8.82] GRADE not reported 8 studies · 249 participants |
| Dentinal graft (any preparation) | Any control (xenograft, natural healing, other dentin preparation) | Graft failures, immunological reactions and disease transmission 4 to 18 months of follow-up | Pooled total: graft failures 0/249 (0%), immunological reactions 0/249 (0%), disease transmission 0/249 (0%) GRADE not reported 8 studies · 249 participants |
Included primary studies 8
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elfana 2021 Alveolar ridge preservation using autogenous whole-tooth versus demineralized dentin grafts: A randomized controlled clinical trial. PMID:33565656 | 2021 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Hussain 2023 Efficacy of Autogenous Dentin Biomaterial on Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. PMID:38179035 | 2023 | 2 other reviews | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Santos 2021 Autogenous Mineralized Dentin versus Xenograft granules in Ridge Preservation for Delayed Implantation in Post-extraction Sites: A… PMID:33982320 | 2021 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Yang 2023 Alveolar ridge preservation in sockets with severe periodontal destruction using autogenous partially demineralized dentin matrix: A… PMID:37455372 | 2023 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Kuperschlag 2020 Autogenous Dentin Grafting of Osseous Defects Distal to Mandibular Second Molars After Extraction of Impacted Third Molars. PMID:32017585 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Li 2018 Autogenous DDM versus Bio-Oss granules in GBR for immediate implantation in periodontal postextraction sites: A prospective clinical study. PMID:30230681 | 2018 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Pang 2017 Autogenous demineralized dentin matrix from extracted tooth for the augmentation of alveolar bone defect: a prospective randomized… PMID:27279547 | 2017 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Sapoznikov 2023 A novel porcine dentin-derived bone graft material provides effective site stability for implant placement after tooth extraction: a… PMID:36826514 | 2023 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
Overlap with other reviews
Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match). Only the non-Cochrane dental reviews have study lists, so overlap with Cochrane reviews is not counted yet.
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Adults requiring tooth extraction and/or bone grafting for ridge preservation, bone augmentation or immediate implant placement | Adults undergoing tooth extraction with ridge preservation, immediate implant or third molar socket grafting (n=249 patients, 281 sites) |
| Intervention | Any dentinal graft (demineralized, mineralized, partially demineralized, whole tooth) | Autogenous dentin grafts: MDM, DDM, PDDM, whole-tooth graft (n=8 trials) |
| Comparison | Other grafting materials (xenografts, allografts, synthetic) or sockets healed without grafts; comparison between dentinal grafts | Xenograft (Bio-Oss or other) (n=6); natural healing, no graft (n=3); other dentin preparation (n=1) |
| Outcomes | Histomorphometry (new bone, residual graft), ridge dimensional change (CBCT or clinical), implant stability (ISQ), complications | New bone formation, residual graft, ridge dimensional change, ISQ, implant success, complications |
| Study designs | Randomized controlled trials only; English; published 2015 or later | Eight randomized controlled trials (parallel and split-mouth) |
| Timing | Not specified | Follow-up 4 to 18 months (most 6 months) |
AMSTAR 2 items
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | RCT: Yes · NRSI: N/A | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | No | No | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | RCT: Yes · NRSI: N/A | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Low | Low | yes |