Trial reportJournal of periodontology2026
Biomaterial used to counteract ridge reduction following the removal of adjacent teeth: A randomized controlled multicenter study.
Trial report in Journal of periodontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Alveolar ridge preservation versus unassisted socket healing following tooth extraction: a systematic review of controlled clinical studies and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlveolar ridge resorption (ARP) is a well-recognized consequence of tooth extraction, and multiple adjacent extractions may lead to greater ridge reduction than single-tooth extractions. This multicenter randomized controlled trial aimed to assess ridge remodeling after removing 2 adjacent teeth and whether socket grafting with deproteinized bovine bone mineral with collagen (DBBM-C) plus a collagen membrane could counteract the ridge reduction.
methodsForty-two patients requiring 2 adjacent tooth extractions were randomly assigned to either Test (DBBM-C graft + collagen membrane) or Control (natural healing). Impressions were taken immediately after extraction and at 6 months, and models were analyzed to measure changes in horizontal ridge width (bucco-lingual at 3 mm below the crest) and vertical ridge height (buccal and lingual).
resultsAt 6 months, grafted sites had significantly less ridge reduction than controls. Horizontal ridge width reduction averaged 57.7% in Control versus 23.0% in Test (p < 0.001). Vertical height loss was also greater in controls (buccal 3.0 mm vs. 1.5 mm; lingual 2.2 mm vs. 1.3 mm; p < 0.001). Both mesial and distal sockets benefited similarly from grafting, with comparable preservation at each site.
conclusionFilling adjacent extraction sockets with DBBM-C and covering with a collagen membrane significantly reduced horizontal and vertical alveolar ridge resorption compared to unassisted healing. This approach effectively preserves bone volume after multiple tooth extractions, which may facilitate later implant placement. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: When 2 neighboring teeth are removed, the area tends to shrink in width and height as it heals. This bone loss can make it more difficult to place dental implants later. In this study, we tested a method to help maintain the bone after removing 2 adjacent teeth. In the Test group, the empty tooth sockets were filled with a bone graft material (deproteinized bovine bone mineral and collagen) and covered with a collagen membrane. In the Control group, the sites were left to heal physiologically. A total of 42 patients participated, each needing 2 side-by-side teeth removed. After 6 months of healing, we compared models of the patients from right after the extractions to those taken 6 months later. The results showed that the group with the bone graft and membrane had much less bone shrinkage than the group without them. The 2 extraction sites in the graft group maintained their bone height and width similarly. In summary, using a bone substitute material and membrane immediately after multiple tooth extractions helped preserve the jawbone, which could make future treatments like dental implants more successful.
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.