Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34013194›Full record

ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2021

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft with concentrated growth factor versus concentrated growth factor alone in the treatment of intrabony defects.

Tithi Vaid, Santosh Kumar, Rupal Mehta, Sujay Shah, Surabhi Joshi, Susmita Bhakkand, Tanvi Hirani

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tithi VaidDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Santosh KumarDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Rupal MehtaDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Sujay ShahDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Surabhi JoshiDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Susmita BhakkandDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Tanvi HiraniDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Satavahana University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeriodontal disease is one of the major causes of alveolar bone loss. There are various ways of regenerating the lost bone, i.e. guided tissue regeneration, bone grafts, and growth factors. In this purview, it becomes immensely important for a clinician to decide the best modality of treatment. In this study, we compared the effect of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) in combination with concentrated growth factors (CGF) verses CGF alone.

methodsThis double-blind, split-mouth study was conducted on ten patients with two comparable bilateral intrabony defects. Each pair of defects was randomly treated by DFDBA + CGF or CGF alone. Clinical parameters such as plaque index (PI), modified gingival index (MGI), pocket probing depth (PPD), and relative attachment level (RAL) were recorded at baseline, three months, and six months. In addition, radiograph with grids was also taken at baseline and six months. The paired t-test was used to compare the pre- and post-treatment values and the unpaired t-test was used to compare the test and control group.

resultsThe PI score decreased significantly from baseline to six months. Similarly, the mean MGI score decreased significantly from baseline to six months. The intragroup comparison showed that there was a significant reduction in PPD in both the test and control group. However, the intergroup comparison showed that the reduced pocket depth was not significant. The intragroup radiographic comparison showed that there was the significant formation of bone in both the test and control group but inter-group showed that the formation of bone among both the group were non-significant.

conclusionRadiographic and clinical outcomes of this study concluded that post six months, both groups demonstrated significant improvement in clinical and radiographic parameters. However, the addition of DFDBA to CGFs did not give any additional benefits.

Indexed as

allograftconcentrated growth factorperiodontal regeneration

Identifiers

PMID34013194
PMCPMC8118214
OpenAlexW3157411880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.