Relative performance of various biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation: A Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess the histomorphometric outcomes obtained in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with different biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA).Materials and MethodsA search of the existing medical literature until October 1, 2019, was performed. Inclusion criteria were (a) RCTs assessing a two‐stage MSA from the lateral approach using autologous bone or biomaterials for grafting and (b) reported histomorphometric outcomes based on crestal bone core biopsy samples. The Bayesian method was used to perform pairwise meta‐analyses and network meta‐analysis (NMA). The primary outcome, the new bone percentage (NB %), was calculated as mean differences with 95% credible intervals. The interventions were ranked by their posterior probability by calculating the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.ResultsThirty‐four RCTs (842 MSAs) were included in the analysis with a normal healing period (5–8 months). All comparisons were presented in a league table. On the basis of the ranking probability, the most effective bone grafting material for NB% was bovine xenograft + bone marrow concentrate (BMC) (81%), followed by bovine xenograft + platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) (77%), bioactive glass ceramic + autologous bone 1:1 (70%), nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite in silica gel (70%), and bioactive glass ceramic (70%). Autologous bone graft alone took the twelfth position with 57%.ConclusionWithin the limitations of the present NMA, the analysis did not confirm autologous bone alone as the gold standard for MSA and showed superiority of composite grafts such as bovine xenograft + BMC after 5–8 months of healing.