SynthesisF1000Research2025
Comparison of xenograft and allograft bone graft for oral and maxillofacial surgical preparation prior to dental implantation: A systematic review.
Synthesis in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07444970 (Comparative Evaluation of Xenograft Alone and Sticky Bone in Sinus Lift With Concurrent Implant Placement), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Comparative Evaluation of Xenograft Alone and Sticky Bone in Sinus Lift With Concurrent Implant Placement: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of xenograft and allograft bone graft for oral and maxillofacial surgical preparation prior to dental implantation: A systematic review.F1000Research · 2025Pooled it
- Autologous Tissue Grafts for Chin Augmentation With or Without Genioplasty: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative Analysis of Bone Remodeling Dynamics and Bone Vitality Following Standard Bone Augmentation Procedures: A Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Dental implant rehabilitation after jaw tumor resection: a mini-review of protocols and quality of life across treatment modalities.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Trabecular bone remodelling following lateral window maxillary sinus augmentation with allograft versus xenograft: a retrospective one-year comparative fractal dimension analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Distinct healing dynamics associated with xenograft selection in guided bone regeneration.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The potential of eggshell membrane in bone regeneration: a scoping review of applications and advances.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Review
- Enhanced bone regeneration and cellular protection from oxidative stress using a vitamin C-based scaffold.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The implantation of teeth by using dental implants can necessitate the use of bone grafting through xenograft and allograft to increase bone density in the place to induce the integration with the hard tissue. The most commonly used xenografts are usually bovine or porcine and are used in oral and maxillofacial surgery and allografts are those that are taken from the human cadaveric tissue. Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare clinical usefulness of xenografts and allografts utilized in the front of dental implant placement in adult individuals experiencing oral and maxillofacial surgical procedure. Method: The systematic search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library (2016 2024) on terms: bone graft AND (xenograft OR allograft) AND dental implant was used. The studies of adults using human xenografts versus allografts in English and published in English were included. Studies that use chemotherapy, cancer, heavy smoking, autografts, and use of animal models were avoided. The quality of studies was estimated with the Cochrane tool by two reviewers who screened and evaluated it. Result: 12 of the 340 studies that included 395 patients (mean age 40-46; 29.9% male, 70.1% female) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Bovine allografts (41.9%) and bovine xenografts (58.1%) were among the grafts utilized. Alveolar ridge preservation (3), delayed (2), immediate (6), and sinus augmentation (2) were among the procedures. The sinus floor, premolars, anterior maxilla, and posterior mandible were frequently used as graft sites. A lack of demographic diversity and small sample sizes were among the limitations. The buccal wall dehiscence and aesthetics in anterior sites require more research. Conclusion: According to the findings of this systematic review, the advantages of synthetic xenografts like Bio-Oss and synthetic allografts like PerioGlas are exactly the same.
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.