ArticleCureus2023
A Quantitative Assessment to Compare the Dimensions of the Alveolar Ridge Width Using Different Techniques for Implant Placement.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe success of any dental implant surgery depends on the correct diagnosis and treatment planning. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the dimensions of the alveolar ridge width using different techniques for implant placement. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study involved 27 partially edentulous subjects aged 18-50, including males and females. In this study, the dimensions of the ridge were evaluated by ridge mapping on a cast, ridge mapping using a bone caliper, and ridge mapping with the help of an occlusal radiograph. All three methods were compared with ridge mapping by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). For each subject, the site of implant placement was marked on the study model. Alveolar ridge measurement was done in the mouth by a bone caliper under local anesthesia with the help of a stent with a hole. Ridge mapping on a cast was done after sectioning the cast and marking with the help of a periodontal probe and stent. Ridge mapping was done on an occlusal radiograph by converting an acetate stent into a radiographic stent. Finally, CBCT was taken for each patient for ridge mapping. All four readings were tabulated.
resultsComparing the mean alveolar ridge width of four groups, ANOVA showed significantly different alveolar ridge width among the groups (F=7.89, p<0.001). The validity (accuracy and precision) of ridge mapping on a cast, ridge mapping using a bone caliper, and occlusal radiograph against the CBCT (gold standard) was done using concordance correlation analysis. The concordance correlation analysis showed the highest association (ρ=0.8196) and precision (ϸ=82.61%) of ridge mapping using a bone caliper with CBCT. However, the accuracy of ridge mapping on a cast (Cb=99.42%) was the highest, followed by ridge mapping using a bone caliper (Cb=82.61%). The analysis concluded that both techniques are equivalent to CBCT and can be used interchangeably.
conclusionThe mean alveolar ridge width of the occlusal radiograph was the highest, followed by CBCT, ridge mapping on a cast, and ridge mapping using a bone caliper the least (occlusal radiograph > CBCT > ridge mapping on cast >ridge mapping using bone caliper). But at the same time, it can also be used interchangeably.
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.