Patient‐reported outcome measures and health economics in regenerative periodontal therapy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractUnderstanding patient responses to periodontal regeneration is crucial. This systematic review and meta‐analysis addressed two key questions: (a) the impact of periodontal regeneration on patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for intrabony and furcation involvement and (b) the cost‐effectiveness of periodontal regeneration for treating periodontal defects. Twenty‐four studies were included, with 20 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting patient‐reported outcomes and five (three RCTs and two economic model‐based studies) reporting cost‐effectiveness outcomes. Results favored regeneration therapy over conventional flap surgery for intrabony defects, showing improvements in qualitative (i.e., amount of regenerated attachment apparatus) and quantitative parameters (i.e., probing and radiographic parameters). In terms of PROMs, regenerative treatments involving barrier membranes resulted in longer chair times and higher rates of complications (such as membrane exposure or edema) compared to flap with biologic agents or access flap alone. Despite this, oral health‐related quality of life improved after both regenerative and extraction procedures. Economically, regeneration remained favorable compared to extraction and replacement or open flap debridement alone for periodontal defects. Single‐flap variants in open flap debridement yielded similar outcomes to regenerative treatment, offering a potentially cost‐effective option. Nevertheless, further discussion on the benefits of less‐invasive flap designs is needed due to the lack of histological evaluation.