*2.4. Information Sources*

An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), SCOPUS, Scielo, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published between 2000 and 2021. References of relevant studies selected were also searched to identify articles with potential inclusion. The last search was performed on 8th January 2021.

#### *2.5. Search Strategy*

The following search terms were used:


#### *2.6. Study Selection*

All articles were reviewed initially by three experts (R.A.-A., E.R.-M., and B.G.-N.). In the event of any discrepancies, these were resolved by J.L.-L.

The first phase of the research consisted of the selection of titles, to eliminate those not concerning our research and eliminate the repeated ones. The second phase consisted of reading the abstract of each article to evaluate some parameters of inclusion. Finally, the full text of all studies selected was obtained.

#### *2.7. Data Collection Process and Items*

One reviewer R.A.-A., extracted the data from the selected studies, including characteristics of the study (authors, year of publication, country, and design), sample characteristics (number of patients, mean ages, and number of sites), surgery characteristics (the type of defect, type of surgery performed and materials used) and finally, the post-operatory details and outcomes (follow-up period, percentage of membrane exposures, horizontal/vertical bone regeneration obtained and implant survival, success, and failure rate) which were synthesized in Table 1 and Table 5. A second author (B.G.-N.) verified all the information collected.

The implant success rate was evaluated according to Albrektsson et al. criteria [14]: (i) Absence of subjective complaints such as pain, foreign body sensation, and/or dysesthesia; (ii) Absence of mobility; (iii) Absence of peri-implant radiolucency and infection with pus suppuration; (iv) Marginal bone resorption (MBR) not exceeding 1.5 mm after the first year of loading and up to 0.2 mm yearly thereafter.
