ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Efficacy of Alveolar Ridge Preservation in Periodontally Compromised Molar Extraction Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Alveolar ridge preservation versus unassisted socket healing following tooth extraction: a systematic review of controlled clinical studies and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The clinical benefit of alveolar ridge preservation in the posterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Autologous platelet concentrates in alveolar ridge preservation: A systematic review with meta-analyses.Periodontology 2000 · 2025Pooled it
- Guided Alveolar Ridge Preservation (G-ARP) with a Subperiosteal Cortical Lamina: A Retrospective Observational Case Series.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Impact of Bone Particle Size on Alveolar Ridge Preservation in Periodontally Compromised Molar Extraction Sites.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Immediate vs. Delayed Implant Placement Following Alveolar Ridge Procedures with Xeno-Hybrid Bovine Bone Graft: A Retrospective Cohort with Operator-Level Comparison.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomaterial strategies for precision regeneration of the tooth extraction socket: integrating site phenotype, pathological microenvironment, and healing sequence.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Alveolar Ridge Preservation in Posterior Extraction Sockets: A Literature Review and Proposal of a Novel Therapeutic Classification.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2026Review
- A deformable SIS/HA composite hydrogel coaxial scaffold promotes alveolar bone regeneration after tooth extraction.Bioactive materials · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in periodontally compromised molar extraction sites.
methodsAn electronic search was performed on 10th November 2023 across five databases, seeking randomised/non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs/NCTs) that included a minimum follow-up duration of four months. The RoB2 and Robins-I tools assessed the risk of bias for the included studies. Data on alveolar ridge dimensional and volumetric changes, keratinized mucosal width, and need for additional bone augmentation for implant placement were collected. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was carried out to derive the pooled estimates.
resultsSix studies were incorporated in the present review, and a total of 135 molar extraction sockets in 130 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. ARP was undertaken in 68 sites, and 67 sites healed spontaneously. The follow-up time ranged from 4 to 6 months. The meta-analysis of both RCTs and NCTs showed significant differences in mid-buccal ridge width changes at 1 mm level below ridge crest with a mean difference (MD) of 3.80 (95% CI: 1.67-5.94), mid-buccal ridge height changes (MD: 2.18; 95% CI: 1.25-3.12) and volumetric changes (MD: 263.59; 95% CI: 138.44-388.74) in favour of ARP, while the certainty of evidence is graded low to very low. Moreover, ARP appeared to reduce the need for additional sinus and bone augmentation procedures at implant placement with low certainty of evidence.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, alveolar ridge preservation in periodontally compromised extraction sites may, to some extent, preserve the ridge vertically and horizontally with reference to spontaneous healing. However, it could not eliminate the need for additional augmentation for implant placement. Further, longitudinal studies with large sample sizes and refined protocols are needed.
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.