ArticleImaging science in dentistry2026
Reliability of a novel stent-based tomographic method to measure dimensional changes after alveolar ridge preservation in extraction sockets with buccal bone dehiscence.
Article in Imaging science in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study presents and evaluates the reliability of a novel standardized tomographic measurement method using a digitally designed stent to assess dimensional changes after alveolar ridge preservation in extraction sockets with buccal bone dehiscence. Materials and Methods: Nine patients requiring extraction of a single-rooted tooth with 2-8 mm buccal bone dehiscence were included. A tomographic guide was digitally designed to fit the adjacent teeth and included a hyperdense element to identify the exact site of the bone defect. The guide was used during the initial pre-extraction scan to localize the defect. Six months after extraction and alveolar ridge preservation, and before implant placement, a second scan was performed with the same guide. Two calibrated examiners identified the corresponding slices from the pre- and post-extraction scans by locating the hyperdense marker. They digitally superimposed the images and performed measurements to evaluate changes in ridge dimensions. Each examiner repeated the measurements 3 times, 1 week apart. Intra- and inter-examiner reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: The intra-examiner intraclass correlation coefficients for dimensional changes ranged from 0.71 to 0.99. The inter-examiner coefficients were 0.94 for buccal bone height, 0.76 for palatal bone height, 0.87 for buccal ridge width, and 0.79 for palatal ridge width, although wide confidence intervals suggested some variability between examiners. Conclusion: The proposed method enabled precise identification of the same anatomical site across scans. It provided a repeatable, reproducible approach for standardized measurement of alveolar ridge changes following preservation procedures in sockets with buccal bone dehiscence.
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.