SynthesisClinical oral investigations2015
Evaluation of the bone regeneration potential of bioactive glass in implant site development surgeries: a systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-additive effect of the DNA methylation inhibitor, 5-Aza-dC, and glass as a culture surface on osteogenic differentiation.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Preclinical and Clinical Applications of Biomaterials in the Enhancement of Wound Healing in Oral Surgery: An Overview of the Available Reviews.Pharmaceutics · 2020Review
- A clinico-radiographic and histomorphometric analysis of alveolar ridge preservation using calcium phosphosilicate, PRF, and collagen plug.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2019Article
- Comprehensive in vitro and in vivo studies of novel melt-derived Nb-substituted 45S5 bioglass reveal its enhanced bioactive properties for bone healing.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Compositional and histological comparison of carbonate apatite fabricated by dissolution-precipitation reaction and Bio-OssJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of bioactive glass (BG) in bone regeneration for implant site development procedures. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe following specific question was formulated with reference to Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes (PICO): "In persons that undergo bone regeneration surgeries for implant site development, what histological outcomes does the use of BG yield, alone or in combination with AB, compared to positive or negative controls?".
resultsThe 1st phase of screening yielded 400 titles and abstracts. A total of 12 studies reporting on the use of bioactive glass were scrutinized for inclusion in the final analysis and 5 studies were selected for qualitative synthesis of the results. Data were divided into two categories: ridge preservation (n = 2) and sinus augmentation (n = 3).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this review, it can be concluded that (1) the combination of BG with AB chips in a 1:1 ratio is an efficacious treatment modality for direct sinus augmentation, with histological results comparable to 100 % AB. (2) When used for ridge preservation, BG yields a high percentage of true bone regeneration. (3) Currently, no reliable controlled studies report histological outcomes from the use of BG in ridge augmentation procedures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians may consider BG bone substitutes as efficacious alternatives for ridge preservation and sinus augmentation surgical procedures. Further controlled clinical studies are warranted to determine if bone-to-implant contact is improved in BG-grafted sites versus controls.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.