ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Periosteal-secured suture and fixation device in horizontal guided bone regeneration: a retrospective study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare volumetric and linear hard tissue changes, as well as the efficacy of augmentation using periosteal secured suture (PSS) and fixation devices (FD) for resorbable membrane stabilization in horizontal guided bone regeneration (GBR). MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective matched cohort study was conducted on 14 patients undergoing horizontal GBR, with 7 in each of the PSS and FD (screws/tacks) groups. Inclusion criteria included the availability of high-quality pre- and post-GBR cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and complete documentation of patient- and GBR-related characteristics. Patient-related variables (medical history and demographics) and GBR-related variables (location, type of bone substitute and membrane, and complications) were extracted from dental records. Postoperative CBCT scans were obtained at least 5 months after GBR procedure. CBCT subtraction analysis was performed using spatial registration and semi-automatic segmentation. Outcome variables included volumetric hard tissue gain (primary outcome), volumetric hard tissue loss, efficacy of augmentation (i.e. volumetric gain relative to defect extent), and changes in linear vertical and horizontal hard tissue dimensions between pre- and post-operative scans, measured at the mesial, middle, and distal planes.
resultsBoth PSS and FD groups demonstrated significant increases in the linear horizontal dimension from preoperative to postoperative (p < 0.05). The mean horizontal hard tissue gains at 3 mm from the crestal bone in the middle plane were 2.8 ± 1.6 mm for the PSS group and 3.8 ± 1.2 mm for the FD group. The mean volumetric gain and efficacy of augmentation were 0.8 ± 0.9 cm³ and 0.025 ± 0.018 cm³/mm for the PSS group, and 0.6 ± 0.3 cm³ and 0.024 ± 0.010 cm³/mm for the FD group, respectively. No significant differences were observed between groups in linear dimensions, volumetric changes, or efficacy (p > 0.05).
conclusionsStabilizing resorbable membranes using periosteal secured sutures or fixation devices in horizontal guided bone regeneration procedures results in comparable linear and volumetric hard tissue gains, demonstrating similar efficacy in hard tissue augmentation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Periosteal secured sutures and fixation devices are both reliable methods for stabilizing resorbable membranes in horizontal guided bone regeneration, yielding comparable efficacy in hard tissue augmentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41361664What 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.