ArticleInternational journal of implant dentistry2026
The efficacy of injectable bone fillers for alveolar ridge preservation: a microcomputed tomographic analysis.
Article in International journal of implant dentistry, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the efficacy of injectable bone fillers for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP). MATERIALS AND
methodsMandibular premolars (P2, P3, P4) were bilaterally extracted in nine beagle dogs. Each tooth underwent hemisection, with the mesial root devitalized and filled with calcium hydroxide, while the distal roots were extracted. This resulted in six sockets per dog, which were randomly assigned to four injectable test materials (T1-T4), one control (C), and one negative control group (N). Primary wound closure was achieved in all groups except for N. After 12 weeks, tissue blocks were analyzed using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). The primary outcome was bone volume fraction (BV/TV, %). Secondary outcomes included trabecular thickness (Tb.Th, mm), trabecular separation (Tb.Sp, mm), bone surface to bone volume ratio (BS/BV, mm
resultsAfter 12 weeks of healing, all groups were associated with a similar BC/TV values (64.6%, 68.2%, 69.0%, 66.5%, 76.5% and 79.8% in the T1, T2, T3, T4, C and N groups, respectively; p > 0.05 for all between group comparisons). No statistically significant differences were found among groups for Tb.Th, Tb.Sp, BS/BV, BBD, VBH, BBW and LBW.
conclusionsWithin its limitations, the present study showed comparable efficacy of injectable bone fillers in maintaining alveolar ridge dimensions compared with the C and N groups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Injectable bone fillers represent a convenient and potentially effective alternative for alveolar ridge preservation procedures.
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.