种植体周围炎的再生外科治疗：系统综述和荟萃分析
Regenerative Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
摘要(中文译文)
本系统综述和荟萃分析评估了再生手术治疗与开放翻瓣清创术（OFD）在种植体周围炎管理中的临床有效性，其次评估了更先进的再生方法，包括引导骨再生（GBR）、富血小板纤维蛋白（PRF）和透明质酸（HA），与单纯骨移植相比是否提供额外的临床获益。按照PRISMA指南和PICO模型，对PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science进行了全面检索，涵盖1993年至2024年期间。从2119篇识别出的文章中，审查了63篇全文论文，其中12项研究符合所有纳入标准。这些研究比较了再生治疗与OFD及骨移植，采用临床结局指标包括探诊深度（PPD）、影像学骨水平（RBL）、探诊出血（BOP）、溢脓（SUP）、黏膜退缩（REC）和临床附着水平（CAL）。荟萃分析采用随机效应模型进行。与OFD相比，再生治疗在影像学骨水平增量方面表现出更优的结果（< 0.001），而在PPD（= 0.77）、BOP（= 0.13）、SUP（= 0.42）、REC（= 0.14）或CAL（= 0.96）方面未观察到统计学显著差异。骨移植与其他再生材料之间的比较也未显示统计学显著差异。再生手术改善了影像学骨结局，但在软组织参数方面并未始终优于OFD，且没有任何先进的再生方式表现出明显优于单纯骨移植的临床优势。需要进一步开展方法学标准化的高质量随机对照试验，以建立种植体周围炎手术的临床指南。
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the clinical effectiveness of regenerative surgical treatments compared with open flap debridement (OFD) in the management of peri-implantitis and, secondarily, assessed whether more advanced regenerative approaches, including guided bone regeneration (GBR), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and hyaluronic acid (HA), provide additional clinical benefit compared with bone grafting alone. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and the PICO model, covering the period from 1993 to 2024. From 2119 identified articles, 63 full-text papers were reviewed, and 12 studies met all inclusion criteria. These studies compared regenerative treatments with OFD and bone grafting using clinical outcomes of probing pocket depth (PPD), radiographic bone level (RBL), bleeding on probing (BOP), suppuration (SUP), mucosal recession (REC), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Regenerative treatments demonstrated superior outcomes in radiographic bone level gain compared with OFD ( < 0.001), while no statistically significant differences were observed for PPD ( = 0.77), BOP ( = 0.13), SUP ( = 0.42), REC ( = 0.14), or CAL ( = 0.96). Comparisons between bone grafting and other regenerative materials also showed no statistically significant differences. Regenerative procedures improved radiographic bone outcomes but did not consistently outperform OFD in soft tissue parameters, and no advanced regenerative modality demonstrated clear clinical superiority over bone grafting alone. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials with standardized methodologies are needed to establish clinical guidelines for peri-implantitis surgery.
如何引用
AMA
Gabor Fuerst, Shko Atta Ali, Xiaohui Rausch-Fan, Markus Laky. Regenerative Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Dentistry journal. 2026; doi:10.3390/dj14030180.
APA
Gabor Fuerst, Shko Atta Ali, Xiaohui Rausch-Fan, Markus Laky (2026). Regenerative Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Dentistry journal. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj14030180
GB/T 7714
Gabor Fuerst, Shko Atta Ali, Xiaohui Rausch-Fan, Markus Laky. Regenerative Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.[J]. Dentistry journal, 2026 doi:10.3390/dj14030180.
在 PubMed增强版 阅读全文
翻译全文 · AI 文献问答 · PDF 原文下载 · 引用导出