ArticleHua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology2025
[Clinical and histological evaluation of three-dimensional printing individualized titanium mesh for alveolar bone defect repair].
Article in Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesTo evaluate the osteogenic efficacy of three-dimensional printing individualized titanium mesh (3D-PITM) as a scaffold material in guided bone regeneration (GBR).
methods1) Patients undergoing GBR for alveolar bone defects were enrolled as study subjects, and postoperative healing complications were recorded. 2) Postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans acquired at least 6 months post-surgery were used to calculate the percentage of actual bone formation volume. 3) Alveolar bone specimens were collected during the first-stage implant surgery for histomorphometric analysis. This analysis quantitatively measured the proportions of newly formed bone and newly formed unmineralized bone within the specimens. Specimens were categorized into three groups based on healing complications (good healing group, wound dehiscence group, 3D-PITM exposure group) to compare differences in the proportions of newly formed bone and newly formed unmineralized bone.
results1) Twelve patients were included. Guided bone regeneration failed in one patient, and 3D-PITM exposure occurred in three patients (exposure rate: 25%). 2) The mean percentage of actual bone formation volume in the 11 successful guided bone regeneration cases was 95.23%±28.85%. 3) Histomorphometric analysis revealed that newly formed bone constituted 40.35% of the alveolar bone specimens, with newly formed unmineralized bone accounting for 13.84% of the newly formed bone. Intergroup comparisons showed no statistically significant differences (
conclusions3D-PITM enables effective bone augmentation. Radiographic assessment demonstrated favorable bone formation volume, while histological analysis confirmed substantial formation of newly formed mineralized bone within the surgical site.
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.