Trial reportClinical oral implants research2025
Bone Substitute Material in the Surgical Therapy of Peri-Implantitis-3-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral implants research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Treatment Outcomes of Peri-Implantitis Reconstructive Therapy: 7-Year Survival and Success of a Randomized Clinical Trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2025Trial
- Surgical Therapy for Peri-Implantitis Using Deproteinised Bovine Bone Mineral With 10% Collagen, Enamel Matrix Derivative and Doxycycline: A Prospective Cohort 10-Year Implant Study.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Treatment Outcome of Surgical Protocols for Peri-Implantitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Specialised University Centre.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Impact of Peri-Implant Phenotype on Implant Therapy Outcomes: A 5-Year Cohort Analysis on Soft Tissue-Level Implants.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Bone Grafts: Everything You Need to Know.Journal of periodontal research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the potential mid-term benefit of the use of a bone substitute material in the reconstructive surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.
methodsA total of 120 subjects (127 implants) affected by peri-implantitis were followed over 3 years in a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Participants had been randomized to either control (access flap surgery) or test group (access flap surgery and bone substitute material). Clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed. The primary outcome was a composite measure including probing pocket depth ≤ 5 mm, absence of bleeding and suppuration on probing, soft tissue recession ≤ 1 mm, and implant neither reoperated nor lost. In an additional outcome (disease resolution), we allowed for one bleeding site and did not consider recession.
resultsWhile 14 implants (11%) were lost and a second surgical intervention had been performed at 3 implants (2.4%), pronounced improvements of clinical parameters were noted at remaining implants in both treatment groups at the 3-year follow-up. This was illustrated by a 3.2-3.5 mm reduction in probing pocket depth and a marginal bone level gain of 1.1-1.3 mm. The primary composite outcome, however, was only achieved at 14% of implants. The second composite outcome defining disease resolution was accomplished at 39% of implants. Patient-reported outcomes were generally favorable.
conclusionAt 3 years, the use of a bone substitute material in the surgical therapy of peri-implantitis did not result in a clear benefit over access flap surgery alone.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT0307706.
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.