ArticleCureus2023
A Modified Ridge-Splitting Technique to Restore a Completely Edentulous Maxillary Arch With a Cement-Retained Implant Prosthesis.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ridge splitting using autogenous bone wedge versus the conventional intercortical augmentation technique in horizontally deficient anterior maxilla: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Minimally Invasive Bone Expansion Using the Ridge Split Technique for Implant Site Modification: A Case Report.Cureus · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present report describes a technique in which the maxillary bone was molded to the desired location using a series of instruments for ridge-splitting procedures. This technique aims to improve bone quality all around the implants at both the crest and apex locations. In some clinical scenarios, insufficient horizontal bone with less than 3 mm prevents implant placement. Thus, ridge splitting is a treatment of choice, and this technique creates bone expansion to form a better receptor site for endosteal implants. A case report is presented involving a completely edentulous 52-year-old male patient presented to the clinic with a horizontal bone defect. The patient complained of having difficulty eating and wants to improve his smile. In this clinical case, a modified ridge-splitting technique was employed, differing from the conventional procedure that uses mallets, chisels, or osteotomes. A lancet and spatula were used for precise ridge splitting, followed by the placement of four endosseous tapered implants-two on each side (Dentis USA, La Palma, USA). Each implant had a diameter of 3.7 mm and a length of 10 mm. These implants were clinically placed in a single visit, with a torque of 30 N/cm² applied to ensure secure fixation. To accommodate the patient's unique maxillary bone anatomy, 25-degree angulated abutments were chosen for the four implants, ensuring a common path of insertion, and optimal angulation for long-term stability and aesthetics. Subsequently, a cemented provisional dental prosthesis restoration was fitted, and the patient reported satisfaction with both function and aesthetics. After a period of five months of osseointegration, the stability of the implants was assessed using a resonance frequency analyzer, yielding positive results. The average resonance frequency values for the maxillary left (canine and premolar) were ISQ 68 and ISQ 71, respectively, while for the maxillary right (lateral incisor and premolar), the values were ISQ 69 and ISQ 73. These readings indicate satisfactory implant stability following the osseointegration process. The postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) showed gain to the bone width besides better function and good results concerning the esthetics. This report describes a modified ridge-splitting technique with a predictable and satisfactory outcome that fulfilled the patient's demands. The presented approach overcomes the disadvantages of two-staged implant placement bone grafting procedures and is also a more affordable option for the patient. CBCT evaluation confirmed bone gain with minimal morbidity after the procedure.
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.