ArticleRegenerative therapy2025
Self-assembling peptide nanofibers and nanoceramics in a model of alveolar bone repair: Insights from in vivo experiments and clinical trial.
Article in Regenerative therapy, 2025. 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.
- Surface microstructures of tricalcium phosphate regulate the autophagy of osteoclasts through the MAPK/ERK signaling pathway.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Article
- Self-assembling peptide nanofibers as growth factor-mimicking scaffolds enhancing the bone regeneration potential of nanoceramics: a triad ofRSC advances · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Tooth extraction initiates a cascade of homeostatic and structural modifications within the periodontal tissues, culminating in alveolar ridge resorption. To prevent ridge resorption following extraction and facilitate successful placement of an implant-supported prosthesis, alveolar ridge preservation was performed. Methods: In this study, the biocompatibility of a nanocomposite consisting of self-assembling peptide nanofibers (organic phase) and tri-calcium phosphate-nano hydroxyapatite (mineral phase), was evaluated in rabbits. Subsequently, the nanocomposite was grafted onto a model of alveolar bone repair in patients. Results: The in vivo findings revealed no significant differences in the irritation ranking score and average thickness of the reaction zone between the nanocomposite and control groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the appearance of necrosis, granulation tissue, fibroplasia, neovascularization, and hemorrhage as well as in the number of neutrophils, mast cells, lymphocytes, macrophages, and giant cells between the two groups. The defect area was completely filled with newly formed bone trabeculae and cavities containing bone marrow, indicating angiogenesis, while remnants of the scaffold were observed in the deeper region of the defects, adjacent to the bone marrow, considered osteoinductive. The clinical trial findings (TRN: IR.IUMS.REC.1401.355) demonstrated robust bone regeneration after 3.5 months of socket preservation, whereas the bone in the control group experienced atrophy. The nanocomposite facilitated soft tissue healing without any signs of infection or other periodontal malfunction. Conclusion: The application of nanotechnology has enhanced the bio-functionality of alloplastic materials, positioning this nanocomposite a promising alternative to autografts and allografts in alveolar bone repair.
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.