ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
Histological and clinical evaluation of novel deproteinized porcine bone mineral in socket preservation: a case report.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2026. 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.
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Socket Preservation Technique Using Allogeneic and Xenogeneic Materials: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Socket preservation, also known as alveolar ridge preservation, is a crucial dental procedure aiming to minimize the resorption of the alveolar ridge following tooth extraction. The use of bone substitutes has reduced the morbidity at the donor areas by decreasing the necessity of autogenous bone grafts and improved the patients' satisfaction and comfort. This case report aimed to evaluate the clinical and histological efficacy of deproteinized porcine bone mineral (DPBM) for socket preservation following molar extraction. A 48-year-old male patient underwent extraction of tooth #17 (maxillary left second molar), followed by socket preservation using DPBM. For comparative purposes, the patient's contralateral tooth #27 (maxillary right second molar) was extracted without socket preservation. After a 3-month follow-up, clinical evaluation revealed satisfactory dimensional stability of the alveolar ridge at the #17 site (bone height: 6.9 mm; bone width reduction: 7.4 mm), whereas the #27 site exhibited significant resorption (bone height: 6.4 mm; bone width: 6.9 mm). Histological analysis via Masson trichrome staining demonstrated new bone formation and tight integration between the DPBM particles and host bone at the #17 site. Subsequently, a dental implant was successfully placed at the preserved socket 4 months post-preservation, with stable osseointegration and functional restoration at the 1-year follow-up. This case confirms the effectiveness of DPBM in maintaining alveolar ridge dimensions and promoting new bone formation, providing a reliable foundation for subsequent implant therapy.
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.