Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40419437›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical periodontology2025

Operative Times, Costs and Patient-Related Outcome Measures in Vertical Ridge Augmentation With Customised Reinforced PTFE Mesh Versus CAD/CAM Titanium Mesh: Secondary Analysis of a Randomised Clinical Trial.

Alessandro Cucchi, Sofia Bettini, Lucia Tedeschi, Debora Franceschi, Istvan Urban, Antonino Fiorino, Giuseppe Corinaldesi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical periodontology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alessandro CucchiPrivate Practice, Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5155-2807
Sofia BettiniPrivate Practice, Bologna, Italy.
Lucia TedeschiPrivate Practice, Bologna, Italy.
Debora FranceschiDepartment of Experimental and Clinic Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9575-749X
Istvan UrbanDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Antonino FiorinoDepartment of Neuroscience and Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, 'Federico II' University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe CorinaldesiDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis secondary analysis of a randomised clinical trial aimed to investigate vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) by comparing complication rates (primary outcome), times, costs and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between customised Ti-reinforced PTFE mesh and customised CAD/CAM titanium mesh. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with vertical bone defects were randomly assigned to alveolar bone augmentation using either Ti-PTFE mesh or Ti mesh (T0). After 6-9 months, barriers were removed, and computer-guided surgery was performed to place implants in the augmented sites (T1). Complications, times, costs and PROMs (anxiety, pain, anti-inflammatory drug dosage, limitations in daily functions) were assessed and analysed.

resultsForty-eight of 50 patients completed the bone augmentation surgery as per protocol. The estimated difference in healing complications was -0.04% (CI: -0.22 to 0.13), confirming the non-inferiority of Ti meshes to PTFE meshes. The estimated differences were -3.50 min (CI: -23.49 to 16.49) for total operative time (p = 0.688); €17.37 (-77.25 to 111.99) for costs (p = 0.130); -0.17 (CI: -0.80 to 0.47) for anti-inflammatory drug usage (p = 0.299); 0.56 (CI: -1.97 to 0.85) for pain levels (p = 0.565); and -0.13 (CI: -0.61 to 0.36) for limitations in daily functions (p = 0.528), on the day after surgery.

conclusionOutcomes were favourable, which encourage the use of both medical devices with low complication rates and both digital approaches, resulting in favourable operative times and PROMs.

Indexed as

Alveolar Ridge AugmentationComputer-Aided DesignOperative TimePolytetrafluoroethyleneSurgical MeshTitaniumAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPostoperative ComplicationsSecondary Data AnalysisSurgery, Computer-AssistedPolytetrafluoroethyleneTitaniumalveolar ridge augmentationcustomised meshguided bone regenerationpatient‐reported outcome measure

Identifiers

PMID40419437
PMCPMC12176461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.