CBCT assessment of crestal bone changes and stability: Immediate versus delayed implant placement in grafted sites.

Mounika Prashanthi, Aella Balakrishna, Kouser Anees, Mohammad Wasimuddin, Seethal, Asim Mustafa Khan, Md Kafeel Ahmed

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mounika PrashanthiDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, G Pulla Reddy Dental College and Hospital, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Aella BalakrishnaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Sai College of Dental Surgery, Vikarabad, Telangana, India.

Kouser AneesDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sri Sai College of Dental Surgery, Vikarabad, Telangana, India.

Mohammad WasimuddinDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Late YCMM and RDF's Dental College and Hospital, Ahilyanagar, Maharashtra, India.

SeethalDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Consultant in Calicut, Kerala, India.

Asim Mustafa KhanDepartment of Biomedical Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.

Md Kafeel AhmedDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, MNR Dental College and Hospital, Sangareddy, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction complicates optimal implant positioning and increases grafting requirements. Therefore, it is of interest to compare immediate versus delayed implant placement in 60 grafted extraction sites using Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and resonance frequency analysis. Delayed placement preserved more buccal bone (-0.42±0.28 mm loss) than immediate placement (-0.89±0.34 mm, p<0.001), with comparable mesial/distal changes. Both achieved equivalent implant stability, integration and survival after 12 months. Delayed placement advances socket management by optimizing buccal contour preservation without compromising outcomes, informing timing decisions.

Indexed as

bone graftingcone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)crestal bone lossdelayed implant placementDental implantsimmediate implant placementimplant stability

Identifiers

PMID42109405

DOI10.6026/973206300220776

PMCPMC13150281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.