RESUMEN
Bone graft materials have mixed effects of bone repair in the field of oral maxillofacial surgery. The qualitative analyses performed by previous studies imply that autogenous odontogenic materials and autogenous bone have similar effects on bone repair in clinical jaw bone transplantation. This retrospective systematic assessment and network meta-analysis aimed to analyze the best effect of clinical application of autogenous odontogenic materials and autogenous, allogeneic, and xenogeneic bone grafts in bone defect repair. A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and other journal databases using selected keywords and Medical Subject Headings search terms. 10 Papers (n = 466) that met the inclusion criteria were selected. The assessment of heterogeneity did not reveal any overall statistical difference or heterogeneity (P = 0.051 > 0.05), whereas the comparison between autogenous and allogeneic bone grafts revealed local heterogeneity (P = 0.071 < 0.1). Risk of bias revealed nine unclear studies and one high-risk study. The overall consistency was good (P = 0.065 > 0.05), and the local inconsistency test did not reveal any inconsistency. The publication bias was good. The confidence regarding the ranking of bone graft materials after GRADE classification was moderate. The effects on bone repair in the descending order were as follows: autogenous odontogenic materials, xenogeneic bone, autogenous bone, and allogeneic bone. This result indicates that the autogenous odontogenic materials displayed stronger effects on bone repair compared to other bone graft materials. Autogenous odontogenic materials have broad development prospects in oral maxillofacial surgery.