ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2025
The use of concentrated growth factors in guiding bone regeneration after microsurgical endodontic surgery for periapical lesions.
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 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.
- Context-dependent effectiveness of autologous platelet concentrates in regenerative endodontic procedures and periapical surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concentrated growth factors (CGFs) hold great potentials for postoperative bone regeneration. This study attempted to investigate the effect of CGF scaffolds on guided bone regeneration after microsurgical endodontic surgery on teeth with periapical lesions. Microsurgical endodontic surgery was performed on 68 teeth with periapical lesions after complete root canal therapy. Autologous CGFs were administered to 38 teeth (the experimental group) while the remaining teeth received no CGF (the control group). The patients were followed for an average of 18 months. Postoperative pain, swelling and the duration were compared between the two groups. The bone volume ratios were quantitatively measured and statistically analyzed with Mimics software. Compared with the control group, the experimental group reported a lower incidence and shorter duration of postoperative pain and swelling, with mild to moderate swelling in the former and mild swelling in the latter. Both groups demonstrated good postoperative wound healing. The experimental group reported a significant reduction in bone volume ratio at postoperative month 3 (
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.