ArticleDentistry journal2024
Ridge Preservation and Augmentation Using a Carbonated Apatite Bone Graft Substitute: A Case Series.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal Dynamics and Uptake Mechanisms of Carbonated Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles in Murine F‑OST Cells.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Carbon dioxide laser-assisted bone regenerative therapy without membrane use.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Guided Bone Regeneration Using Carbonated Apatite Granules and L-Lactic Acid/ε-Caprolactone Membranes: A Case Series and Histological Evaluation.Dentistry journal · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The newly developed mineral carbonated apatite has recently been proposed as a bone graft material for bone regenerative treatment in implant therapy. This case series details the clinical and radiographic outcomes of ridge preservation and ridge augmentation using only carbonated apatite as bone graft material for implant treatment. Twenty patients (36 sites) who required bone regeneration and implant placement were retrospectively assessed. Simultaneous carbonated apatite implant placement was performed using the simultaneous ridge preservation or augmentation approach on 24 sites in 13 patients with sufficient bone quantity for primary stabilization based on preoperative evaluation results. A staged ridge preservation or augmentation approach was used for the remaining 12 sites in seven patients with insufficient bone quantity. The mean regenerated bone height for each treatment method was as follows: simultaneous preservation, 7.4 ± 3.3 mm; simultaneous augmentation, 3.6 ± 2.3 mm; staged preservation, 7.2 ± 4.5 mm; and staged augmentation, 6.1 ± 2.7 mm. The mean regenerated bone width for each treatment method was as follows: simultaneous preservation, 6.5 ± 2.9 mm; simultaneous augmentation, 3.3 ± 2.5 mm; staged preservation, 5.5 ± 1.7 mm; and staged augmentation, 3.5 ± 1.9 mm. Ultimately, the use of carbonated apatite alone as a bone graft material in implant therapy resulted in stable and favorable bone regeneration.
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.