ArticleDentistry journal2022
An Analysis of Different Techniques Used to Seal Post-Extractive Sites-A Preliminary Report.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Bone Stability After Immediate Implants and Alveolar Ridge Preservation: A 15-Year Retrospective Clinical Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness and Complication Rate of Resorbable Biopolymers in Oral Surgery: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Autogenous dentin for socket preservation: a narrative review of clinical outcomes compared to spontaneous healing.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of Different Techniques in Post-Extractive Socket Regeneration Using Autologous Tooth Graft: Histological and Clinical Outcomes.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Hyaluronic Acid Treatment of Post-Extraction Tooth Socket Healing in Subjects with Diabetes Mellitus Type 2: A Randomized Split-Mouth Controlled Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Extraction Socket Augmentation with Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF): The Rationale for Socket Augmentation.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- Bone Regeneration: Overview and Future Trends.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
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
backgroundBone grafting in post-extractive site improves tissue regeneration. Soft tissue sealing of the grafted post-extractive alveolus is supposed to limit microbiological contamination from the oral cavity and to stabilize the coagulum. Several techniques are presented in the literature to reach this goal using different heterologous matrices or autogenous grafts. In addition, recently, a technique based on the use of granulation tissue in the post-extractive alveolus has been proposed.
aimTo compare the effect of different graft sealing approaches in post-extractive sites by qualitatively evaluating their healing process. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective investigation included 30 patients requiring post-extractive site regeneration in the aesthetic area. Post-extractive sites were regenerated using a bovine bone matrix and patients were divided into three groups (10 patients in each group) according to the material used to seal the alveolar socket. In the UD group, the granulation tissue was used to seal the defect; in the PC group, epithelial-connective soft tissue graft was used, and in the COLL group, a collagen-based membrane was employed. Images of the post-extractive sites at different follow-up periods (2 and 12 weeks) were taken and the healing process was blindly evaluated by two independent practitioners. The Healing Index (HI) by Landry, Turnbull and Howley was used to assess the quality of the healing process. The combination of presence/absence of five clinical criteria defines an HI ranging from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). Patients' clinical-pathological variables were recorded. One-way ANOVA was used to explore the dependence of HI on the different socket preservation protocols.
resultsBased on clinical-pathological characteristics of the included patients, there were no statistically significant differences among the different sealing techniques. At the 2-week follow-up appointment, HI did not differ among the socket preservation protocols evaluated. Moreover, smoking status and reason for extraction did not influence the HI among the three groups (two-way ANOVA
conclusionsThe use of collagen porcine membranes may represent a suitable option to improve the patient healing process in grafted post-extractive sites together with reducing the surgical intervention time compared to alternative sealing techniques.
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.