ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2024
Alveolar ridge preservation and its impact on marginal bone level changes around dental implants: A retrospective, cohort comparative study.
Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Prosthetic Emergence Profile on Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Stability: A Comprehensive Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Alveolar ridge preservation and its impact on marginal bone level changes around dental implants: A retrospective, cohort comparative study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis retrospective study compared the outcomes of implants placed in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) treated sites with those in spontaneously healed (SH) sites. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included patients presenting with one implant placed in an ARP-treated socket and one in an SH site. The primary outcome was the comparison of Marginal Bone Level Changes (MBLC). Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors influencing MBLC, including age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle.
resultsOf these, 28 patients (23 females, 82.1%) were included in this analysis. Sockets in the SH group were classified as type I, whereas type II sockets were more common in the ARP group. The SH group exhibited significantly higher MBLC than the ARP group (p = 0.032), with values, respectively, of 1.00 [0.25; 1.62] and 0.40 [0.00; 1.00] mm. Among all evaluated parameters, the performance of ARP was the only factor significantly affecting MBLC (β = -0.72, SE: 0.32, p = 0.026). Age, gender, smoking, parafunctional habits, and prosthetic emergence angle did not significantly affect MBLC.
conclusionsThe study shows the potential role of ARP in maintaining stable marginal bone levels around implants. In our sample, ARP significantly reduced MBLC compared with spontaneous healing, highlighting its possible impact in clinical practice for better peri-implant bone stability.
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.