ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Novel Pre-Customized Saddle-Shape Soft Tissue Substitute for Volume Augmentation: An Ex Vivo Study in Pig Mandibles.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Apical Positioned Flap with a Combination of Mucograft and Fibro-Gide for Augmenting Keratinized Gingiva with Thin Gingival Phenotype: A Case Report.European journal of dentistry · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTooth loss results in hard- and soft-tissue volume loss over time. We compared the handling of three different soft tissue substitutes (STS) to the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) for soft tissue volume augmentation in a pig ex vivo model.
methodsFive dentists simultaneously shaped, placed and sutured randomized four graft types in single-tooth soft tissue defects created in pig mandibles. The STS, produced from slightly crosslinked collagen fibres (VCMX), were either 3 mm or 6 mm thick blocks or a newly developed pre-customized saddle-shape. Each graft type was handled 20 times. The time required for shaping, placement, and suturing was recorded. Dentists reported outcomes on the grafts' handling were evaluated with a visual-analogue-scale (VAS). Statistical analysis included calculating means and medians and testing significance.
resultsThe mean time of 0.72 min for shaping the pre-customized saddle-shape STS was significantly lower than 1.31 min for SCTG, 1.73 min for 3 mm STS and 2.17 min for 6 mm STS. Placement/suturing time was similar for all grafts. The dentists mainly preferred the saddle-shape STS and the SCTG.
conclusionsThe saddle-shape STS required less time for graft-shaping and, therefore, reduced the overall treatment time, suggesting a more efficient and less invasive workflow for soft tissue augmentation.
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.