ReviewBDJ open2023
Soft tissue expansion using self-inflating osmotic hydrogel expanders prior to bone augmentation: healing and complications. Evidence-based review.
Review in BDJ open, 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- 4D-printed adaptive hydrogel tissue expanders for ear and breast reconstruction.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026Article
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis review aims to assess complication rates, soft tissue gain, and bone gain associated with the use of self-inflating osmotic hydrogel tissue expanders (SOHTEs) for soft tissue expansion (STE).
methodsA comprehensive search on Pubmed and Google Scholar databases was conducted to identify human studies using SOHTEs for STE; last searched in March 2023. Expansion phase details and expander variables were documented. Complication rates, soft tissue gain, and bone gain reported in each study were also recorded. The inclusion criteria encompassed human studies ranging from evidence levels II-IV (Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence), without specific date limits. For assessing bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), a Risk of Bias tool was employed. The synthesised results were presented through tables, sunburst plots, and bar charts.
resultsA total of 13 studies were identified, comprising 4 RCTs, 1 cohort study, and 8 case-series. Employment of SOHTEs yielded an overall complication rate of 17% (24/140 sites), with expander perforation accounting for 9.3% (13/140) of the sites. Specific complication rates included dehiscence (1.4%, 2/140 sites), paraesthesia (1.4%, 2/140 sites), and infection (1.4%, 2/140 sites). All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were categorised at Level II. The remaining investigations primarily consisted of Level IV case-series lacking controls. All studies demonstrated some concerns towards bias.
conclusionSTE studies using SOHTEs exhibit a reduction in complications associated with bone augmentation in scenarios of inadequate soft tissue coverage. Preliminary evidence suggests potential benefits even in cases with sufficient soft tissue. Adherence to procedural precautions may reduce the risk of expander perforations, further diminishing complications. Subsequent studies should incorporate individual patient and expander variables in their reports to explore the impact of expansion phases on complication rates, as well as bone and soft tissue augmentation.
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.