ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
An evaluation of novel AMP2-coated electrospun composite scaffolds for intraoral bone regeneration: a proof-of-concept
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bone Tissue Engineering: Scaffold Design Principles, Biomaterial Advances, and Strategies for Functional Regeneration and Clinical Translation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Advances in Functional Scaffolds for Bone and Joint Surgery.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Healing Kinetics of Sinus Lift Augmentation Using Biphasic Calcium Phosphate Granules: A Case Series in Humans.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alveolar ridge preservation by guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a surgical procedure that can be performed prior to implant placement to increase the likelihood of survival. Autogenic, allogenic, or xenogeneic derived bone (particulate graft) are frequently placed in conjunction with a barrier membrane for GBR; however, advancements in tissue engineering have led to the development of promising synthetic alternatives. Fiber-based scaffolds exhibit high surface-to-volume ratio and thereby improve cellular adhesion, reduce the likelihood of dehiscence and poor bone regeneration often associated with poorly immobilized particulate graft. This study aimed to evaluate the Methods: Four-walled mandibular defects were created in each adult beagle dog (n = 4 defects per dog; n = 4 dogs for a total of 16 defects). Each defect received one of three experimental (test) groups: (i) OsteoAdapt without membrane (OA), (ii) OsteoAdapt with porcine membrane (OA/ZM), (iii) OsteoAdapt mixed with porcine particulate xenograft (Zcore™) with porcine membrane (OA/P/ZM) and compared to a positive control - Zcore™ with porcine membrane (CTRL). After 4-weeks Results: Histomorphometric measurement of bone regeneration (% bone) within the region of interest revealed no significant differences between OA, OA/ZM, or OA/P/ZM in comparison to the CTRL at 4-weeks ( Conclusion: Compared to defects treated with porcine-derived particulate and barrier membrane (CTRL), defects filled with OA exhibited bone regeneration throughout the defect, with bone overgrowth when covered by a barrier membrane at 4-weeks
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.