Trial reportClinical oral implants research2022
Alveolar ridge preservation with guided bone regeneration or socket seal technique. A randomised, single-blind controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral implants research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Plasma rich in growth factors in alveolar ridge preservation: randomized, controlled clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Dimensional Changes After Different Alveolar Ridge Preservation Techniques for Posterior Region: A Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2025Trial
- Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using a Collagenated Xenograft: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International dental journal · 2025Trial
- The effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) versus freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) used in alveolar ridge preservation on the peri-implant soft and hard tissues: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Alveolar ridge preservation with guided bone regeneration or socket seal technique. A randomised, single-blind controlled clinical trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2022Trial
- Effect of reactive soft tissue combined with injectable platelet-rich fibrin for alveolar ridge preservation in severe defect molar sites: a retrospective cohort study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- ITGA1 promotes osteogenic differentiation of human periodontal ligament stem cells via FAK-mediated PI3K-Akt activation.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of the membrane composed of biodegradable polycaprolactone and polyglycolic acid layers in guided bone regeneration.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Histomorphometric Evaluation of Socket Preservation Healing Using Xenogeneic Bone Substitute Combined with Statin: A Prospective Split-Mouth Clinical Pilot Study.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of β-TriCalcium Phosphate for Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A Systematic Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Effects of extended guided bone regeneration on the labial alveolar wall of adjacent teeth in the anterior maxilla: a retrospective cohort study.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Customized Titanium Mesh vs. Screw Tent-Pole Grafting: A Retrospective Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2026Article
- Clinical Evidence on Resorbable Calcium Phosphate Biomaterials for Alveolar Bone Regeneration: A Scoping Review Focusing on Brushite, Monetite, and Tricalcium Phosphates.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Reliability of a novel stent-based tomographic method to measure dimensional changes after alveolar ridge preservation in extraction sockets with buccal bone dehiscence.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Alveolar ridge preservation with lyophilized microspheres of human dental pulp stem cells following 3D dynamic osteogenic induction.Stem cells translational medicine · 2026Article
- Extraction and implant restoration of an inverted impacted anterior tooth with severe crown-root dilaceration: a 4-year follow-up case report.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- One-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of immediate versus delayed placement of wide-diameter implants in the mandibular molar region.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Histological and clinical evaluation of novel deproteinized porcine bone mineral in socket preservation: a case report.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Optimizing Alveolar Ridge Preservation and GBR: A Systematic Review of Membranes, Grafts, and Soft Tissue Strategies for Personalized Care.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
- Comparative effectiveness of autologous particulate dentin graft for alveolar ridge preservation: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare radiographic bone changes, following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) using Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), a Socket Seal (SS) technique or unassisted socket healing (Control). MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients requiring a single rooted tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla, were randomly allocated into: GBR, SS and Control groups (n= 14/). Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images were recorded post-extraction and at 4 months, the mid-buccal and mid-palatal alveolar ridge heights (BARH/PARH) were measured. The alveolar ridge width, cross-sectional socket and alveolar-process area changes, implant placement feasibility, requirement for bone augmentation and post-surgical complications were also recorded.
resultsBARH and PARH was found to increase with the SS (0.65 mm ± 1.1/0.65 mm ± 1.42) techniques, stabilise with GBR (0.07 mm ± 0.83/0.86 mm ±1.37) and decrease in the Control (-0.52 mm ± 0.8/-0.43 mm ± 0.83). Statistically significance was found when comparing the GBR and SS BARH (p = .04/.005) and GBR PARH (p = .02) against the Control. GBR recorded the smallest reduction in alveolar ridge width (-2.17 mm ± 0.84), when compared to the Control (-2.3 mm ± 1.11) (p = .89). A mid-socket cross-sectional area reduction of 4% (-2.27 mm
conclusionGBR ARP was found to be more effective at reducing radiographic bone dimensional changes following tooth extraction.
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.