ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Vertical and Horizontal Ridge Augmentation with Titanium-Reinforced Dense PTFE and Reinforced PTFE Mesh: A Prospective Comparative Case Series.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare vertical bone gain (VBG) and horizontal bone gain (HBG) after guided bone regeneration using titanium-reinforced dense PTFE (TiR-dPTFE) versus reinforced PTFE mesh (RPM) at 9 and 12 months on three-dimensional tomographic imaging, and to perform histological assessment in selected cases. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective comparative case series included 14 patients (46 vertical ridge defect sites) treated with guided bone regeneration using either Ti-reinforced dPTFE membranes (TiR-dPTFE; n = 23) or resorbable porcine collagen membranes (RPM; n = 23). All sites received a 60:40 mixture of autogenous bone chips and anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM). After 9 months, during implant placement, a protective secondary augmentation using a 70:30 ABBM/autogenous mixture was performed and covered with a collagen membrane. Vertical and horizontal bone gain (VBG, HBG) were assessed on standardized matched CBCT cross-sections obtained at 9 and 12 months. Core biopsies were harvested at implant placement (9 months) for histological evaluation. Surgical and healing complications were recorded.
resultsBoth membranes produced significant VBG. TiR-dPTFE achieved greater VBG than RPM at 9 months (
conclusionsBoth TiR-dPTFE and RPM are reliable options for vertical ridge augmentation; TiR-dPTFE yielded superior and more stable vertical gains over 12 months, with comparable horizontal outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: TiR-dPTFE may offer enhanced vertical augmentation, while both membranes remain suitable for implant site development.
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.