The use of DBB/CF reduced the magnitude of vertical bone resorption , yet the study showed high risk of bias .
Implication s of Key Findings Within the limitations of this systematic review , L-PRF reduced the magnitude of vertical and horizontal bone resorption , which places L-PRF as a potential material of choice for ridge preservation procedures .
Conclusions Within the limitations and weaknesses of both studies , the use of DBB/CF prevented the vertical crestal bone resorption while the L-PRF prevented both the horizontal and vertical crestal bone resorption .
Background The purpose of this systematic review was to accurately assess the procedural success of  ridge preservation technique  through the application of strict inclusion and exclusion criteria .
Surgical protocols for ridge preservation after tooth extraction. A systematic review.
OBJECTIVE This systematic review aims to evaluate the scientific evidence on the efficacy in the surgical protocol s design ed for preserving the alveolar ridge after tooth extraction and to evaluate how these techniques affect the placement of dental implants and the final implant supported restoration . MATERIAL AND METHODS A thorough search in MEDLINE - PubMed , Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials ( CENTRAL ) was conducted up to February 2011 . R and omized clinical trials and prospect i ve cohort studies with a follow-up of at least 3 months reporting changes on both the hard and soft tissues ( height and /or width ) of the alveolar process ( mm or % ) after tooth extraction were considered for inclusion . RESULTS The screening of titles and abstract s result ed in 14 publications meeting the eligibility criteria . Data from nine of these 14 studies could be grouped in the meta-analyses . Results from the meta-analyses showed a statistically significant greater ridge reduction in bone height for control groups as compared to test groups ( weighted mean differences , WMD = -1.47 mm ; 95 % CI [ -1.982 , -0.953 ] ; P < 0.001 ; heterogeneity : I(2 ) = 13.1 % ; χ(2 ) P-value = 0.314 ) and a significant greater reduction in bone width for control groups compared to the test groups ( WMD = -1.830 mm ; 95 % CI [ -2.947 , -0.732 ] ; P = 0.001 ; heterogeneity : I(2 ) = 0 % ; χ(2 ) P-value = 0.837 ) . Subgroup analysis was based on the surgical protocol used for the socket preservation ( flapless/flapped , barrier membrane/no membrane , primary intention healing/no primary healing ) and on the measurement method utilized to evaluate morphological changes . Meta-regression analyses demonstrated a statistically significant difference favoring the flapped subgroup in terms of bone width ( meta-regression ; slope = 2.26 ; 95 % IC [ 1.01 ; 3.51 ] ; P = 0.003 ) . CONCLUSIONS The potential benefit of socket preservation therapies was demonstrated result ing in significantly less vertical and horizontal contraction of the alveolar bone crest . The scientific evidence does not provide clear guidelines in regards to the type of bio material , or surgical procedure , although a significant positive effect of the flapped surgery was observed . There are no data available to draw conclusions on the consequences of such benefits on the long-term outcomes of implant therapy
The use of DBB/CF reduced the magnitude of vertical bone resorption , yet the study showed high risk of bias .
Implication s of Key Findings Within the limitations of this systematic review , L-PRF reduced the magnitude of vertical and horizontal bone resorption , which places L-PRF as a potential material of choice for ridge preservation procedures .
Conclusions Within the limitations and weaknesses of both studies , the use of DBB/CF prevented the vertical crestal bone resorption while the L-PRF prevented both the horizontal and vertical crestal bone resorption .
Background The purpose of this systematic review was to accurately assess the procedural success of  ridge preservation technique  through the application of strict inclusion and exclusion criteria .