ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2021
A new morphologic classification of the alveolar ridge after distraction osteogenesis in human patients. A 17 years retrospective case series study.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of sticky bone combined with concentrated growth factor (CGF) for horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation of anterior teeth: a randomized controlled clinical study.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Roadmap of computer-guided bi-axial alveolar distraction osteogenesis in the posterior mandible: neurosensory safety of double scan virtual protocol.BMC oral health · 2026Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo perform a morphologic classification based on the results of bone augmentation after a distraction osteogenesis. MATERIAL AND
methodsThirty-four (34) patients (24 women and 10 men; mean age, 47.1 years (SD=9.5); age range, 23 to 62 years) underwent a total of 42 alveolar ridge distractions before the placement of a total of 89 dental implants. Ridge bone morphology was evaluated as the main ordinal variable. Chi-squared, Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA one-way test were used.
resultsCategory I (30.95%): consisted of wide alveolar rim and no bone defects Category II (28.57%): wide alveolar rim, lateral bone surface concavity. Category III (23.81%): narrow alveolar rim, lateral bone surface concavity. Category IV (2.38 %): distraction transport segment forming a bridge, without bone formed beneath and requiring guided bone regeneration. Category V (9.52%): return of the transport segment to its initial position due to the reverse rotation of the distractor screw. Category VI (4.76 %): distraction transport segment completely lost. Subcategory D (28.57%), consisted of lingual deviation of the distraction axis, occurring in any of the categories I to IV. More men (76.9 %) presented with category I (p<0.001). The use of the chisel resulted mainly in categories I and II (69.4 %) (p<0.001). GBR was only required in 23.1 % of the cases in Category I (p=0.011). The bone height achieved decreases as the category increases, due to the accompanying osteogenic limitations (p<0.001). The implants placed in category I were longer 11.5 ± 0.9 mm (CI95% 10.9-11.9 mm) compared to those placed in category III with a length of 10.4 ± 1.5 mm (CI95% 9.5-11.4 mm) (p=0.035).
conclusionsThe alveolar ridge after distraction osteogenesis could be divided into six morphologic categories which provide a useful basis for decision-making regarding implant placement.
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.