ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Clinical efficacy of guided tissue regeneration combined with orthodontic treatment on periodontitis.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Periodontitis is a common chronic inflammatory disorder caused by bacterial plaque. Our study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of guided tissue regeneration with orthodontic treatment (GTRO) in patients with periodontitis. Methods: Propensity score matching was performed based on gender, age, periodontitis duration, dental malformation, sulcus bleeding index, and gingival index. Clinical efficacy, gingival index (GI), sulcus bleeding index (SBI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment loss (CAL), and depth of bone defect were assessed 6 months post-treatment. The NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3), IL-1β, and IL-18 levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) were determined using ELISA. Results: A total of 131 patients were included in the final analysis, including 64 in the GTR group and 67 in the GTRO group. The GTRO group demonstrated better outcomes, including higher recovery and total efficacy rates. Post-treatment, the GTRO group exhibited greater improvements in GI and SBI, PD, CAL, and depth of bone defect than the GTR group. Levels of NLRP3, IL-1β, and IL-18 in GCF significantly decreased in both groups, with more pronounced reductions observed in the GTRO group. Conclusion: GTRO improved clinical and anti-inflammatory outcomes and was associated with better periodontal health and bone defect repair than GTR alone at 6 months.
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.