ReviewNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
The effect of modern devices of alveolar ridge split and expansion in the management of horizontally deficient alveolar ridge for dental implant: A systematic review.
Review in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of bone expansion, compacting and densification in narrow alveolar crests: a systematic review and a meta-analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The alveolar ridge split and expansion (ARSE) can be performed using conventional devices (osteotome/chisel) or modern devices (ultrasonographic [USG], motorized ridge expansion [MRE], etc.). The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of modern devices for ARSE. This review has been registered at PROSPERO under the number CRD42020213264. A systematic search was conducted by two reviewers independently in databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Grey Open, Hand search of reference lists of relevant studies, and previously published systematic reviews. The article published until September 2020 were searched for this review. The searches identified 24 eligible studies, twenty-two cohort and two randomized control trial studies. A total of 1287 dental implants were installed in 634 patients with the age range of 17-70 years and a minimum of 3 months of follow-up. Ten articles of USG device and seven of MRE device were finally evaluated for metanalysis. The mean ridge width gain was 3.40 mm (USG device) and 2.83 mm (MRE device). The overall implant survival rate was 98.07%. Mean width gain between USG and MRE devices was significantly different (
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.