Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34683712›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Synthetic Material for Bone, Periodontal, and Dental Tissue Regeneration: Where Are We Now, and Where Are We Heading Next?

Chia Wei Cheah, Nisreen Mohammed Al-Namnam, May Nak Lau, Ghee Seong Lim, Renukanth Raman, Peter Fairbairn, Wei Cheong Ngeow

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Biocompatible Mesoporous Materials for Bone Therapy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Chia Wei CheahFaculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-5795-4249
Nisreen Mohammed Al-NamnamSchool of Dental Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4BW, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1832-8496
May Nak LauFaculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-5896-2753
Ghee Seong LimFaculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-2236-1555
Renukanth RamanOral Health Division, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Putrajaya 62590, Malaysia.
Peter FairbairnDepartment of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Detroit Mercy, 2700 Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, Detroit, MI 48208, USA.
Wei Cheong NgeowFaculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-4354-3518
University of Malaya · MYMinistry of Health · MYNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Detroit Mercy · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alloplasts are synthetic, inorganic, biocompatible bone substitutes that function as defect fillers to repair skeletal defects. The acceptance of these substitutes by host tissues is determined by the pore diameter and the porosity and inter-connectivity. This narrative review appraises recent developments, characterization, and biological performance of different synthetic materials for bone, periodontal, and dental tissue regeneration. They include calcium phosphate cements and their variants β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) ceramics and biphasic calcium phosphates (hydroxyapatite (HA) and β-TCP ceramics), calcium sulfate, bioactive glasses and polymer-based bone substitutes which include variants of polycaprolactone. In summary, the search for synthetic bone substitutes remains elusive with calcium compounds providing the best synthetic substitute. The combination of calcium sulphate and β-TCP provides improved handling of the materials, dispensing with the need for a traditional membrane in guided bone regeneration. Evidence is supportive of improved angiogenesis at the recipient sites. One such product, (EthOss

Indexed as

bioglassbone substitutehydroxyapatitepolymerssynthetic

Identifiers

PMID34683712
PMCPMC8537464
OpenAlexW3207672026

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.