ArticleNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
Comparative evaluation of the effect of simvastatin and xenograft (sticky bone) in the third molar socket after surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar.
Article in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. 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.
- The tooth transformer® revolution: autologous dentin biomaterials and platelet concentrates in oral regeneration. A parallel narrative systematic review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
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
Background: Third molar surgery, and more especially mandibular third molar surgery, is among the most often performed and popular operations in oral surgery. This is well known to have major postoperative adverse effects, including limited jaw opening, edema, and pain. Several approaches and biomaterials have been developed to reduce these complications, like osseous grafts, growth factors (PRF, CGF), stem-cell therapy, and osteopromotive substances like statins. Sticky bone, in recent years, has gained popularity due to its osseous and soft tissue healing potential. Methods: The purpose of this clinical trial was to examine the effects of simvastatin and xenograft (sticky bone) on the region around the socket. In this study, 22 patients (representing 44 surgery sites) participated. The indicators of pain, edema, mouth opening, and gingival healing were evaluated in both groups on the third, seventh, and one-month marks. Regeneration of bone and density of bone were compared at the one-month and three-month marks. Results: Patient's postoperative pain significantly reduced in both groups from third day to seventh day till one month with better outcome in group A (sticky bone) in comparison with group B (simvastatin). Swelling decreased postoperatively from third day till one month in both groups, with significant reduction in group A than group B at one month owing to the better soft tissue healing tendency of xenograft (sticky bone). Postoperative mouth opening showed improved outcome in group A in comparison with group B. Gingival healing was not significant when compared in both the groups. The overall comparison of the two groups revealed that there was increased bone regeneration and bone density in group A than in group B at the end of the third month. Conclusion: Xenograft (sticky bone) was more effective in osseous regeneration of the extraction socket as well as more effective in reducing the postoperative complications in comparison with simvastatin (10 mg). Therefore, placement of sticky bone in the extraction socket is justified due to its excellent soft and hard tissue healing potential.
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.