ReviewBrazilian dental journal
Do alternative scaffolds used in regenerative endodontics promote better root development than that achieved with blood clots?
Review in Brazilian dental journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antibiofilm activity of three-dimensional bacterial nanocellulose scaffolds containing antimicrobial agents.Brazilian dental journal · 2026Article
- Scaffold-based Strategies for Direct Pulp Capping in Animal Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Iranian endodontic journal · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of different supplementary protocols for remaining filling material removal in endodontic reintervention: an integrative review.Odontology · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this integrative review was to identify whether alternative scaffolds used in regenerative endodontics contribute to better root development, in relation to the increase in root length and thickness of dentin walls, compared with blood clot (BC) scaffolds. The literature search was conducted in PubMed, SciELO and Lilacs databases, using descriptors related to the topic. After applying the eligibility criteria, 11 articles were selected and analyzed according to the proposed aim. Five clinical and six in vivo studies, conducted in animals, compared different types of alternative scaffolds with BCs, with emphasis on platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF). All scaffolds, alternative or BC, promoted an increase in root length and dentin wall thickness, with varying percentages of increase between studies. In general, there was a significant increase in root length and dentin thickness promoted by PRF and PRP scaffolds, compared with BC. It was concluded that the majority of the scaffolds tested contributed to the increase in root length and thickness of dentin walls, with emphasis on PRF and PRP.
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.