Table 2.
Features of the study sample and outcomes for included studies
| Authors | M/F | Age (mean, SD, range) | Tooth type/location (A/P) | Arch (max/mand) | Follow-up, months | n.teeth ctr treated | n.teeth ctr evaluated | n.teeth test treated | n.teeth test evaluated | Main conclusions | Complications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim et al. [19] * | 16/5 | 54.36 +/− 9.91 (T1) 53.9 +/− 6.7 (T2) | Posterior (molar) | 13 maxilla/8 mandible | 4 | T2: 10 | T2: 10 | T1: 11 | T1: 10 | Alveolar ridge preservation without primary flap closure in molar areas is effective in minimizing ridge resorption. There were no significant differences between test groups in clinical and histomorphometric measurements | 0 |
| Mandarino et al. [13] | 10/10 | 46.2 +/− 15.6 | Posterior | 20 mandible | 4 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | Ridge preservation using the d-PTFE membrane increased the formation of keratinized tissue. The membrane had no influence on the healing process | 0 |
| Chang et al. [20] | 20/22 | 60.0 +/− 10.0 (T) 60.5 +/− 11.6 (C) | NR | 21 maxilla/21 mandible | 6 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | There were no significant differences between the ECM membranes in the changes in the dimension, width, and height of the extraction socket or the quantity of bone tissue | NR |
| Hassan et al. [12] | 6/3 | 34–71 (54.88) | Anterior & premolars | 14 maxilla/8 mandible | 3 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | Intentionally exposed ACM is equally effective in ridge preservation compared to d-PTFE, however aid in reducing post-operative VAS scores and improved histomorphometric features | 0 |
| Lim et al. [21] | 16/10 |
53.83 +/− 16.22 (T) 48.14 +/− 16.11 (C) |
Anterior & premolars | Maxilla / mandible | 4 | 15 | 14 | 15 | 12 | The horizontal ridge alteration in ridge preservation did not differ significantly between using the non-cross linked and cross linked collagen membranes with collagenated bovine bone, but the vertical ridge alteration was more pronounced when using the cross linked membrane | Membrane exposure in the test group occurred in 47% and in the control group was 57% (8/14). Uneventful secondary healing was achieved in all cases |
| Natto et al. [8] | 16/12 | 25 – 80 (55.4) | Single-rooted tooth (except lateral incisor) | 23 Maxilla/5 mandible | 4 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | Collagen matrix seal and CS, when combined with FDBA, significantly minimized ridge resorption in all dimensions and maintained buccal soft tissue thickness in sockets, however there was no significant difference between both groups | NR |
| Arbab et al. [11] | 9/15 |
53 +/− 15 (CM) 52 +/− 15 (PTFE) |
Anterior & premolars | 22 maxilla/2 mandible | 4 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | No significant difference (p > 0.05) was found in horizontal and vertical dimensional change between CM and d-PTFE group. Moreover, the percent vital bone was similar and not significantly different between both groups | 0 |
| Parashis et al. [16] | 12/11 |
35–65 (54.2) (CM) 36–68 (54.8) (ECM) |
Incisors & premolars | 21 maxilla/2 mandible | 4 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | No significant differences were observed between CM and ECM group in clinical and radiographical soft tissue and hard tissue changes. However, significant correlations for changes in gingival thickness (p = 0.001) and crestal bone width (p = 0.002) with pre-operative buccal plate thickness were observed | 1 pt in the CM group presented post-surgical infection with exfoliation of the graft |
| Meloni et al. [17] | 12/18 | 26–72 (48) | Anterior | Maxilla | 12 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | Significant correlations for changes in gingival thickness (p = 0.001) and crestal bone width (p = 0.002) with pre-operative buccal plate thickness were observed | 0 |
| Perelman et al. [22] | 7/16 | 26–68 | Single-rooted tooth | 18 Maxilla/5 mandible | 9 | 11 | 11 | 13 | 12 | Bone area fraction was found significantly higher in group augmented with DBBM and collagen membrane (p < 0.05) | 0 |
| Engler-Hamm et al. [23] | 4/7 | 20–57 (41.09) | Posterior | Maxilla | 6 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | Ridge preservation without flap advancement preserves more keratinized tissue and has less post-operative discomfort and swelling | NR |
| Lekovic et al. [24] | 10/6 | 52.6 +/− 11.8 | Anterior & premolars | Maxilla/mandible | 6 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | Alveolar ridge preservation with bioabsorbable membrane made of glycolide and lactide polymers showed significantly less loss of alveolar bone height, more internal socket bone fill, and less horizontal resorption of the alveolar bone ridge , compared to sites without membrane | 0 |