Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31973237›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Comparison between Micro-Computed Tomography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in the Assessment of Bone Quality and a Long-Term Volumetric Study of the Augmented Sinus Grafted with an Albumin Impregnated Allograft.

Márton Kivovics, Bence Tamás Szabó, Orsolya Németh, Dóra Iványi, Bálint Trimmel, Ilona Szmirnova, Kaan Orhan, Eitan Mijiritsky, György Szabó, Csaba Dobó-Nagy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Cone beam computed tomography vs. microcomputed tomography for trabecular bone healing assessment : An ex vivo study in rabbit mandibles.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Márton KivovicsDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Bence Tamás SzabóDepartment of Oral Diagnostics, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Orsolya NémethDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Dóra IványiDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Bálint TrimmelDepartment of Oral Diagnostics, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Ilona SzmirnovaDepartment of Department of Oro-Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary.
Kaan OrhanDentomaxillofacial Radiology Department, Ankara University, 06560 Ankara, Turkey.
Eitan MijiritskyHead and Neck Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Otoryngology, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv 62431, Israel.
György SzabóDepartment of Department of Oro-Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Semmelweis University, 1085 Budapest, Hungary.
Csaba Dobó-NagyDepartment of Oral Diagnostics, Semmelweis University, 1088 Budapest, Hungary.
Semmelweis University · HUAnkara University · TRTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

Semmelweis University Faculty of Dentistry Research Grant 2017/9
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of our study was to compare micromorphometric data obtained by cone-beam computed-tomography (CBCT) and microcomputed-tomography (micro-CT) of the augmented sinus and to evaluate the long-term stability of the bone gain achieved using BoneAlbumin. Sinus lifts, and after 6-months, healing bone-biopsy and implant placement were carried out. Specimens were analyzed by micro-CT. A total of 16 samples were collected from nine patients (mean age 54.7 ± 6.5 years). Pre-, postoperative, and 3-year control CBCT-data were registered to determine from where the biopsy samples were harvested. Micromorphometric variables were calculated from the micro-CT- and CBCT-data, and their correlation was determined by Spearman's test. The volume of augmented bone was calculated at the time of implant placement and after 3 years. A positive correlation was found between bone-volume fraction, trabecular-separation, open-, and total-porosity, while a negative correlation was found between trabecular-thickness obtained from CBCT- and micro-CT-data (

Indexed as

3-year follow upallograftbone qualitycone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)microcomputed tomography (micro-CT)sinus floor elevationvolumetric study

Identifiers

PMID31973237
PMCPMC7073646
OpenAlexW3002286796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.