Advertisement

Flapped versus flapless alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • M.A. Atieh
    Correspondence
    Address: Momen A. Atieh, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Dubai Healthcare City, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
    Affiliations
    Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Dubai Healthcare City, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Honorary Associate Professor, Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
    Search for articles by this author
  • L. Alfardan
    Affiliations
    Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Dubai Healthcare City, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
    Search for articles by this author
  • N.H.M. Alsabeeha
    Affiliations
    Ras Al-Khaimah Dental Center, Ministry of Health and Prevention, United Arab Emirates
    Search for articles by this author

      Abstract

      Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) procedures can limit bone changes following tooth extraction. Flapped and flapless surgical approaches have been used for ARP; however, there is a lack of strong scientific evidence regarding their specific influences on the clinical outcomes of ARP. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of flapped and flapless surgical approaches on the dimensional changes of hard and soft tissues and patient-reported outcomes following ARP. Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared flapped ARP by means of a coronally advanced flap to flapless ARP where barrier membranes were left exposed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. Data were analysed using a statistical software program. A total of 754 studies were identified, of which five studies with 149 extraction sockets in 128 participants were included. Overall, meta-analysis did not show any significant differences in the changes in ridge width or height between flapped and flapless ARP. The use of flapless ARP was associated with significantly less postoperative pain, thicker labial soft tissues, and marginally more favourable changes in width of the keratinized tissues compared to the flapped approach. The short-term hard tissue changes following ARP with a flapped or flapless approach are comparable. Postoperative pain and labial soft tissue changes are more favourable following ARP using a flapless approach. Further evidence from long-term RCTs is still required to substantiate the current findings.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Atieh M.A.
        • Alsabeeha N.H.
        • Payne A.G.
        • Duncan W.
        • Faggion C.M.
        • Esposito M.
        Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; 2015CD010176
        • Hämmerle C.H.
        • Araújo M.G.
        • Simion M.
        • Osteology Consensus Group 2011
        Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 80-82
        • Atieh M.A.
        • Alsabeeha N.H.
        • Payne A.G.
        • Ali S.
        • Faggion C.M.J.
        • Esposito M.
        Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021; 4CD010176
        • Darby I.
        • Chen S.T.
        • Buser D.
        Ridge preservation techniques for implant therapy.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24: 260-271
        • Troiano G.
        • Zhurakivska K.
        • Lo Muzio L.
        • Laino L.
        • Cicciu M.
        • Lo Russo L.
        Combination of bone graft and resorbable membrane for alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.
        J Periodontol. 2018; 89: 46-57
        • Karaca C.
        • Er N.
        • Gulsahi A.
        • Koseoglu O.T.
        Alveolar ridge preservation with a free gingival graft in the anterior maxilla: volumetric evaluation in a randomized clinical trial.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015; 44: 774-780
        • Thalmair T.
        • Fickl S.
        • Schneider D.
        • Hinze M.
        • Wachtel H.
        Dimensional alterations of extraction sites after different alveolar ridge preservation techniques—a volumetric study.
        J Clin Periodontol. 2013; 40: 721-727
        • Jung R.E.
        • Ioannidis A.
        • Hammerle C.H.F.
        • Thoma D.S.
        Alveolar ridge preservation in the esthetic zone.
        Periodontol 2000. 2018; 77: 165-175
        • Braut V.
        • Bornstein M.M.
        • Belser U.
        • Buser D.
        Thickness of the anterior maxillary facial bone wall—a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011; 31: 125-131
        • Spray J.R.
        • Black C.G.
        • Morris H.F.
        • Ochi S.
        The influence of bone thickness on facial marginal bone response: stage 1 placement through stage 2 uncovering.
        Ann Periodontol. 2000; 5: 119-128
        • Barootchi S.
        • Wang H.L.
        • Ravida A.
        • Ben Amor F.
        • Riccitiello F.
        • Rengo C.
        • Paz A.
        • Laino L.
        • Marenzi G.
        • Gasparro R.
        • Sammartino G.
        Ridge preservation techniques to avoid invasive bone reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis: Naples Consensus Report Working Group C.
        Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2019; 12: 399-416
        • Canellas J.
        • Ritto F.G.
        • Figueredo C.
        • Fischer R.G.
        • De Oliveira G.P.
        • Thole A.A.
        • Medeiros P.J.D.
        Histomorphometric evaluation of different grafting materials used for alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 49: 797-810
        • Vignoletti F.
        • Matesanz P.
        • Rodrigo D.
        • Figuero E.
        • Martin C.
        • Sanz M.
        Surgical protocols for ridge preservation after tooth extraction. A systematic review.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 22-38
        • Barone A.
        • Ricci M.
        • Romanos G.E.
        • Tonelli P.
        • Alfonsi F.
        • Covani U.
        Buccal bone deficiency in fresh extraction sockets: a prospective single cohort study.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 26: 823-830
        • Park Y.S.
        • Kim S.
        • OH S.H.
        • Park H.J.
        • Lee S.
        • Kim T.I.
        • Lee Y.K.
        • Heo M.S.
        Comparison of alveolar ridge preservation methods using three-dimensional micro-computed tomographic analysis and two-dimensional histometric evaluation.
        Imaging Sci Dent. 2014; 44: 143-148
        • Vittorini Orgeas G.
        • Clementini M.
        • De Risi V.
        • de Sanctis M.
        Surgical techniques for alveolar socket preservation: a systematic review.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013; 28: 1049-1061
        • Wang R.E.
        • Lang N.P.
        Ridge preservation after tooth extraction.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23: 147-156
        • Moher D.
        • Liberati A.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • Altman D.G.
        • PRISMA Group
        Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151 (W264): 264-269
      1. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.0. Cochrane Collaboration.
        2019 ([Accessibility verified November 27, 2020])
        • Richardson W.S.
        • Wilson M.C.
        • Nishikawa J.
        • Hayward R.S.
        The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions.
        ACP J Club. 1995; 123: A12-A13
        • Faggion Jr, C.M.
        • Atieh M.A.
        • Park S.
        Search strategies in systematic reviews in periodontology and implant dentistry.
        J Clin Periodontol. 2013; 40: 883-888
        • Aladmawy M.A.
        • Natto Z.S.
        • Steffensen B.
        • Levi P.
        • Cheung W.
        • Finkelman M.
        • Ogata Y.
        • Hur Y.
        A comparison between primary and secondary flap coverage in ridge preservation procedures: a pilot randomized controlled clinical trial.
        Biomed Res Int. 2019; 20197679319
        • Barone A.
        • Borgia V.
        • Covani U.
        • Ricci M.
        • Piattelli A.
        • Iezzi G.
        Flap versus flapless procedure for ridge preservation in alveolar extraction sockets: a histological evaluation in a randomized clinical trial.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 26: 806-813
        • Barone A.
        • Toti P.
        • Piattelli A.
        • Iezzi G.
        • Derchi G.
        • Covani U.
        Extraction socket healing in humans after ridge preservation techniques: comparison between flapless and flapped procedures in a randomized clinical trial.
        J Periodontol. 2014; 85: 14-23
        • Engler-Hamm D.
        • Cheung W.S.
        • Yen A.
        • Stark P.C.
        • Griffin T.
        Ridge preservation using a composite bone graft and a bioabsorbable membrane with and without primary wound closure: a comparative clinical trial.
        J Periodontol. 2011; 82: 377-387
        • Hauser F.
        • Gaydarov N.
        • Badoud I.
        • Vazquez L.
        • Bernard J.P.
        • Ammann P.
        Clinical and histological evaluation of postextraction platelet-rich fibrin socket filling: a prospective randomized controlled study.
        Implant Dent. 2013; 22: 295-303
        • Hong H.R.
        • Chen C.Y.
        • Kim D.M.
        • Machtei E.E.
        Ridge preservation procedures revisited: a randomized controlled trial to evaluate dimensional changes with two different surgical protocols.
        J Periodontol. 2019; 90: 331-338
        • Jung R.E.
        • Philipp A.
        • Annen B.M.
        • Signorelli L.
        • Thoma D.S.
        • Hammerle C.H.
        • Attin T.
        • Schmidlin P.
        Radiographic evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
        J Clin Periodontol. 2013; 40: 90-98
        • Kim D.M.
        • De Angelis N.
        • Camelo M.
        • Nevins M.L.
        • Schupbach P.
        • Nevins M.L.
        Ridge preservation with and without primary wound closure: a case series.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013; 33: 71-78
        • Kim D.M.
        • Nevins M.
        • Camelo M.
        • Schupbach P.
        • Kim S.W.
        • Camelo J.M.
        • Al Hezaimi K.
        • Nevins M.L.
        The feasibility of demineralized bone matrix and cancellous bone chips in conjunction with an extracellular matrix membrane for alveolar ridge preservation: a case series.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011; 31: 39-47
        • Schneider D.
        • Schmidlin P.R.
        • Philipp A.
        • Annen B.M.
        • Ronay V.
        • Hammerle C.H.
        • Attin T.
        • Jung R.E.
        Labial soft tissue volume evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
        J Clin Periodontol. 2014; 41: 612-617
        • Schulz K.F.
        • Chalmers I.
        • Hayes R.J.
        • Altman D.G.
        Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.
        JAMA. 1995; 273: 408-412
        • Wang H.L.
        • Boyapati L.
        “PASS” principles for predictable bone regeneration.
        Implant Dent. 2006; 15: 8-17
        • Araujo M.G.
        • Silva C.O.
        • Misawa M.
        • Sukekava F.
        Alveolar socket healing: what can we learn?.
        Periodontol 2000. 2015; 68: 122-134
        • Chan H.L.
        • Lin G.H.
        • Fu J.H.
        • Wang H.L.
        Alterations in bone quality after socket preservation with grafting materials: a systematic review.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013; 28: 710-720
        • Fontana F.
        • Maschera E.
        • Rocchietta I.
        • Simion M.
        Clinical classification of complications in guided bone regeneration procedures by means of a nonresorbable membrane.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2011; 31: 265-273
        • Zitzmann N.U.
        • Naef R.
        • Scharer P.
        Resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes in combination with Bio-Oss for guided bone regeneration.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997; 12: 844-852
        • Lee J.
        • Lee J.B.
        • Koo K.T.
        • Seol Y.J.
        • Lee Y.M.
        Flap management in alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018; 33: 613-621