Observational studyScientific reports2020
Bioactive glass granules S53P4 in osteotomy Le Fort I.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Use of S53P4 Bioactive Glass in the Treatment of Bone Defects and Infected Bone: A Systematic Review of the Quality of Clinical Outcomes and A Grade Assessment.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Pooled it
- Research Progress on Biomaterials with Immunomodulatory Effects in Bone Regeneration.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated bioactive glass graft (S53P4) in patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy, with non-grafted patients as controls. Computed tomography facial scans of the 25 patients submitted for Le Fort I were divided into two groups: Group 1-S53P4 group and Group 2-without grafting. CT scans were analyzed in the immediate postoperative period (T1) and 6 months later (T2), for linear bone gap measurements, tomographic radiodensity and behavior of the maxillary sinus. A Kruskal-Wallis test on bone gap data adopted α significance levels (p ≤ 0.05). The Friedman test (p ≤ 0.05) was used to evaluate sinus reaction cores. For gap measurements, we observed a decrease in median data between T1 and T2 in both groups, with statistical significances observed between groups in T0; G1 presented statistical difference in its two studied times (p ≤ 0.0001). For bone density, the studied data behaved inversely. G1's bone density decreased from T1 to T2, whereas in G2 there was an increase from T1 to T2. S53P4 did not elicit increased reactions and/or sinus infections in the G1 group (p ≥ 1.00). S53P4 did not impact on Le Fort I osteotomies as a coadjuvant and a favorable factor in bone formation, and appeared innocuous in the maxillary sinus.
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.