ArticleJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Concentrated growth factor's effect on the tissues around the dental implant using the socket shielding technique.
Article in Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present case report describes the use of radiographic techniques to assess the quality and quantity of the bone surrounding the dental implants treated with concentrated growth factor (CGF). Intraoral examination revealed a cracked, root canal-treated anterior tooth (#12). After discussing the surgical protocol, including its advantages and limitations, socket shielding was performed, implant osteotomy was prepared, and CGF was placed. Assessment of crestal bone levels, volume, and density was conducted at baseline and at the 9-month follow-up after implantation. Soft-tissue parameters were also evaluated at 3 and 9 months postimplantation. At recall, both bone quality and quantity had increased, and crestal bone levels remained stable. No changes were observed in soft-tissue parameters between the pre- and postimplantation phases. These findings suggest that CGF can promote the regeneration of both hard and soft tissues by enhancing bone quality and quantity and by improving the peri-implant soft-tissue environment.
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.