Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37206304›Full record

ArticleBiomaterials translational2023

Systematic evaluation of three porcine-derived collagen membranes for guided bone regeneration.

Andrew Tai, Euphemie Landao-Bassonga, Ziming Chen, Minh Tran, Brent Allan, Rui Ruan, Dax Calder, Mithran Goonewardene, Hien Ngo, Ming Hao Zheng

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomaterials translational, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew TaiCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Euphemie Landao-BassongaCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Ziming ChenCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Minh TranUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Brent AllanCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Rui RuanCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Dax CalderUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Mithran GoonewardeneUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Hien NgoUWA Dental School, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
Ming Hao ZhengCentre for Orthopaedic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia.
University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Guided bone regeneration is one of the most common surgical treatment modalities performed when an additional alveolar bone is required to stabilize dental implants in partially and fully edentulous patients. The addition of a barrier membrane prevents non-osteogenic tissue invasion into the bone cavity, which is key to the success of guided bone regeneration. Barrier membranes can be broadly classified as non-resorbable or resorbable. In contrast to non-resorbable membranes, resorbable barrier membranes do not require a second surgical procedure for membrane removal. Commercially available resorbable barrier membranes are either synthetically manufactured or derived from xenogeneic collagen. Although collagen barrier membranes have become increasingly popular amongst clinicians, largely due to their superior handling qualities compared to other commercially available barrier membranes, there have been no studies to date that have compared commercially available porcine-derived collagen membranes with respect to surface topography, collagen fibril structure, physical barrier property, and immunogenic composition. This study evaluated three commercially available non-crosslinked porcine-derived collagen membranes (Striate+

Indexed as

barrier membranecollagen membranedental implantguided bone regenerationimmunogen

Identifiers

PMID37206304
PMCPMC10189808
OpenAlexW4377142701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.