ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2019
A Human Clinical and Histomorphometrical Study on Different Resorbable and Non-Resorbable Bone Substitutes Used in Post-Extractive Sites. Preliminary Results.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite Versus Autogenous Bone Grafts in Alveolar Cleft Grafting.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Use of Deproteinized Bovine Bone in Association with Calcium Sulphate for Alveolar Socket Preservation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Innovative Concepts and Recent Breakthrough for Engineered Graft and Constructs for Bone Regeneration: A Literature Systematic Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Buccal periosteal inversion (BUPI) for defect closure and keratinized gingiva width preservation after tooth extraction - technique modification.The Saudi dental journal · 2021Article
- Comparison Study of the Histomorphometric Results after Socket Preservation with PRF and Allograft Used for Socket Preservation-Randomized Controlled Trials.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Advances in Dental Materials "at a Glance."Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe healing of sockets following teeth extraction results in a marked reduction of the height and width of the ridge. This in vivo study aims to assess and compare the efficacy of calcium sulphate (CS) and sintered nano-hydroxyapatite (NHA) in postextraction sockets. MATERIALS AND
methods10 subjects were enrolled for single or multiple tooth extraction and implant placement. Each site was randomly assigned to one of four groups and filled with CS, NHA, a combination of CS and NHA, or left to normal healing. After five months tissue samples were harvested from the extraction sites and prepared for histological investigations.
resultsHistomorphometric analysis showed that the average percentages of vital bone was 13.56% ± 13.08% for CS, 17.84% ± 7.32% for NHA, 58.72% ± 8.77% for CS + NHA%, and 80.68% ± 21.8% for the controls; for the connective tissue the results were 33.25% ± 35.75% for CS, 55.88% ± 21.86% for NHA, 17.34% ± 8.51% for CS + NHA, and 22.62% ± 0.52% for the controls; for residual biomaterial the results were 0.56% ± 0.52% for CS group, 21.97% ± 0.79% for NHA, and 47.54% ± 20.13% for CS + NHA.
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.