40 |
SANZ et al .
FIGURE 1 Regenerative surgical therapy of intrabony defects and residual pockets [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Available evidence The evidence base includes 17 RCTs with 493 patients. The qual - ity of the evidence for the statement was assessed according to GRADE and considered to be high. In the systematic review un - derlying this recommendation (Jepsen et al., 2019), a standard meta-analysis grouping all regenerative techniques versus OFD was performed altogether with ancillary analysis. Results indi - cated that regenerative therapies had a significant benefit over OFD in terms of both primary and surrogate outcomes. Risk of bias Study quality assessment identified an unclear risk of bias for the majority of the studies. Bearing in mind that six papers failed to dis - close support and seven papers reported industry funding for the research.
Consistency Regenerative treatment consistently demonstrated added benefits (in terms of furcation improvement, horizontal bone gain, horizontal and vertical attachment gain, pocket reduction) in comparison with OFD. Clinical relevance and effect size The mean adjunctive benefit of a regenerative treatment is clinically relevant (1.3 mm vertical CAL and greater PPD reduction), and the effect size is significant as furcation improvement showed an odds ratio (OR) of 21 (Bayesian credible interval 5.8–69.4) in favour of re - generative techniques. Balance of benefit and harm The benefit of regenerative therapies to promote tooth retention out - weighs the adverse events which consist mainly of local wound failure.
Made with FlippingBook Annual report