Trial reportBMC oral health2026
Clinical and radiographic evaluation of autologous albumin-rich platelet-rich fibrin membrane versus synthetic collagen membrane for immediate dental implant placement in the maxillary esthetic zone: a preliminary randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06643468 (Evaluation of the Effectiveness of ALB-PRF With Two Types of Bone Grafts With Putty Form in the Treatment of Peri-Implant Bony Defects Around Immediate Dental Implants in the Maxillary Aesthetic Zone.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of ALB-PRF With Two Types of Bone Grafts With Putty Form in the Treatment of Peri-Implant Bony Defects Around Immediate Dental Implants in the Maxillary Aesthetic Zone.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extended platelet rich fibrin versus allograft as a space filling material in immediate dental implant placement.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Dentine-derived barrier membrane versus extended platelet-rich fibrin for guided bone regeneration: a 2-year randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
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
backgroundLong-term aesthetic stability following immediate implant placement depends on achieving predictable bone regeneration within the peri-implant “jumping gap” and existing labial bone defects. Despite using a beta-tricalcium phosphate/calcium sulfate putty bone graft (β-TCP + CS), regenerative membranes are essential adjuncts to ensure superior healing. Therefore, this preliminary study aimed to determine whether autologous Albumin-Platelet-Rich Fibrin (Alb-PRF) provides superior aesthetic and osseous outcomes compared with the standard synthetic collagen membrane. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis single-blind, preliminary randomized clinical trial involved 20 participants with a non-restorable maxillary aesthetic tooth and a labial bone defect who received immediate implants. Participants were allocated into two groups (n=10 each): Group I received a β-TCP + CS putty combined with a synthetic collagen membrane, while Group II received the same bone graft combined with an Alb-PRF membrane placed in the labial jumping gap. Primary outcome variables, including marginal bone loss (MBL) and labial bone thickness (LBT), were assessed via CBCT at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the Pink Esthetic Score (PES) and clinical parameters (Plaque Index, Bleeding on Probing, and Peri-implant Probing Depth), which were measured at baseline, 4, 6, and 12 months post-surgery.
resultsClinical parameters showed no significant inter-group differences. However, Group II demonstrated significantly higher PES scores at 4 months (p=0.027) and 12 months (p=0.018). While Group I exhibited significantly better preservation of LBT at 6 months (p=0.005) and 12 months (p=0.001), Group II showed significantly less MBL at 6 months (P ≤ 0.001) and 12 months (p=0.023).
conclusionBoth membranes effectively treat peri-implant defects. While the collagen membrane better preserves labial bone thickness, Alb-PRF yields superior aesthetic scores and reduces marginal bone loss.
trial registrationThis preliminary randomized clinical trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov and approved on 15/10/2024 with trial number (NCT06643468).
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.