ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2026
Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Customized Titanium Mesh vs. Screw Tent-Pole Grafting: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2026. 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
backgroundGuided bone regeneration (GBR) is a predictable approach for managing severe alveolar ridge deficiencies prior to implant placement. Resorbable collagen membranes supported by tenting screws are widely used, although space maintenance in non-contained defects may be challenging. Customized CAD/CAM titanium meshes have been introduced to enhance graft stability and surgical workflow, but comparative clinical evidence remains limited.
objectiveTo compare clinical, radiographic, procedural, and peri-implant outcomes of customized CAD/CAM titanium meshes versus resorbable collagen membranes supported by tenting screws for horizontal and/or vertical alveolar ridge augmentation. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 40 patients with severe alveolar ridge defects, allocated to two groups (n = 20 each). Both groups received particulate bone grafts stabilized either with tenting screws and a resorbable collagen membrane or with a patient-specific CAD/CAM titanium mesh. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans at baseline and 6 months were used to assess vertical and horizontal bone gain. Intraoperative time, complications, pseudo-periosteum formation, implant survival, and peri-implant marginal bone levels at prosthetic loading and at 5-year follow-up were recorded.
resultsAt 6 months, mean bone height reached 8.7-8.93 mm in the maxilla and 9.25-9.35 mm in the mandible, while mean ridge width ranged from 4.7 to 5.3 mm, with no significant intergroup differences (p > 0.05). Mean peri-implant marginal bone loss was limited and remained stable from prosthetic loading to the 5-year follow-up in both groups. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the customized mesh group, 72.7 min (range: 60-85) for the Tent-pole group and 62.4 min (range: 60-65) for the Ti-mesh group. All 60 implants placed in 40 augmented sites survived, with no implant failures and no need for additional grafting procedures.
conclusionsBoth GBR techniques provided comparable bone regeneration and long-term peri-implant stability, while customized CAD/CAM titanium meshes were associated with reduced operative time.
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.