ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Bone Profile Around Dental Implants Placed in the Esthetic Zone.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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.
- Horizontal ridge augmentation in maxillary esthetic zone using bovine bone graft versus extended sticky bone with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical study.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Volumetric buccal bone alterations at immediate implant sites with or without soft tissue augmentation: A 6-month assessment.Journal of periodontology · 2026Trial
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
Objective: To evaluate the bone profile around dental implants placed in the esthetic zone through periodontal assessment and radiographic analysis using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: We conducted a clinical observational study of 35 subjects who received dental implants placed in the esthetic zone to replace lost anterior teeth. Clinical evaluation included a comprehensive periodontal examination. The esthetic outcomes of the soft tissue around the implants were assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES). Patient satisfaction was assessed by using a specially designed questionnaire. The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-14 was used to assess the quality of life. The bone profile around the implant was assessed using CBCT. All the values were compared and statistically analyzed. Results: A soft tissue graft (STG) was associated with the presence of > 2 mm of bone thickness 1 mm from the implant shoulder (p < 0.01). The STG was also significantly associated with bone thickness at 3 and 5 mm (p = 0.04). PES was not significantly associated with the bone thickness, OHIP score, or satisfaction score. Patients with fenestrations had significantly higher scores for functional limitations and pain than those without fenestrations (p = 0.01 and 0.04 respectively). Conclusion: The bone profile around the anterior implant is not ideal. Although the buccal bone was thin around the implant placed in the esthetic zone, it did not affect the esthetic outcomes or overall satisfaction of the patient. However, fenestration defects may affect patients' quality of life.
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.