Histological analysis of socket preservation using DBBM. A systematic review and meta-analysis

source extracted confidence: high 2026-04-09
#animals #bone-substitutes #cattle #humans #minerals

Histological analysis of socket preservation using DBBM. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhao et al., 2020 | J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg | Meta Analysis

Citation

Zhao H, Hu J, Zhao L. Histological analysis of socket preservation using DBBM. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020-Dec;121(6):729-735. doi:10.1016/j.jormas.2020.04.011

Abstract

PURPOSE: Deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) is a type of bone substitute material widely used in tooth extraction sites. However, there is a lack of evidence supporting the benefit of DBBM used for postextraction socket preservation with regard to new bone formation. This meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted to explore whether site preservation (SP) using DBBM could provide benefits with regard to new bone formation compared with natural healing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies reporting histological results for postextraction SP with DBBM and natural healing from 2000 to 2019 were identified in three databases, and a meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Five studies were included. The DBBM group had a significantly lower new bone percentage than the natural healing group, with a MD of -24.75 [95%CI: -39.77, -9.73] (P=0.001). The percentage of connective tissue in the extraction site was not significantly different between the two groups, with a MD of 0.60 [95%CI: -4.85, 6.05] (P=0.83). CONCLUSIONS: SP using DBBM provided no additional benefit with regard to postextraction new bone formation in comparison with natural healing. Due to the lack of high-quality research, further large-sample studies and standard studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.

Key Findings

Five studies were included. The DBBM group had a significantly lower new bone percentage than the natural healing group, with a MD of -24.75 [95%CI: -39.77, -9.73] (P=0.001). The percentage of connective tissue in the extraction site was not significantly different between the two groups, with a MD of 0.60 [95%CI: -4.85, 6.05] (P=0.83).

Outcomes Measured

  • Requires manual extraction

Population

Field Value
Population See abstract
Sample Size See abstract
Age Range See abstract
Condition See abstract

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Bone Substitutes
  • Cattle
  • Humans
  • Minerals
  • Tooth Extraction
  • Tooth Socket

Evidence Classification

  • Level: Meta Analysis
  • Publication Types: Journal Article, Meta-Analysis, Systematic Review
  • Vertical: collagen

Provenance

Source extracted via PubMed E-utilities API on 2026-04-09