ArticleBMC oral health2026
Effect of Sticky Bone on ridge preservation in periodontally compromised posterior extraction sockets: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
Abstract
backgroundThis retrospective study aimed to compare cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based radiographic changes in alveolar ridge dimensions between extraction sockets treated with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) using Sticky Bone (SB) combined with an advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) membrane and those undergoing natural healing (NH), assessed at baseline (pre-extraction) and at 6 months post-extraction. The primary outcomes were changes in ridge width, ridge height, and ridge volume, and the need for supplementary augmentation prior to implant placement was recorded as a secondary outcome.
methodsPatients with Stage III/IV periodontitis who underwent tooth extraction between January 2021 and June 2025 were retrospectively enrolled. According to whether ARP was performed, patients were assigned to the SB or NH group. All underwent CBCT before extraction and 6 months after healing. Alveolar ridge height, width, and volume changes were measured, and the need for additional bone augmentation during implant placement was recorded.
resultsA total of 52 extraction sockets were analyzed, including 25 sockets in the SB group and 27 sockets in the NH group. After 6 months, the SB group showed significantly less ridge width reduction at 1, 3, and 5 mm apical to the crest (p < 0.05). Vertical changes differed between groups, with positive changes in central height and reduced buccal height resorption observed in the SB group (p < 0.05), while no significant difference was found in lingual height. Volumetric analysis indicated greater ridge volume changes in the SB group (p < 0.05). A lower proportion of sockets in the SB group was observed to require supplementary augmentation prior to implant placement (p < 0.05).
conclusionsIn this retrospective radiographic analysis, ARP using Sticky Bone in combination with an A-PRF membrane was associated with more favorable radiographic dimensional and volumetric outcomes in periodontally compromised extraction sockets compared with natural healing.
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.