ArticleCureus2026
Effectiveness of Biphasic Calcium Sulfate Mineral Cement in the Treatment of Advanced Peri-Implantitis: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 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
The authors present the potential use of a hardening regenerative mineral cement in the treatment of bone defects complicated by peri-implantitis. The presented case concerns vertical alveolar ridge atrophy due to periapical inflammation of a tooth adjacent to an implant surface. Given the difficult clinical situation, the patient was consulted on the risk of regeneration, which was a priori associated with a high risk of failure. However, the use of a biphasic calcium sulfate cement, to the authors' surprise, resulted in a spectacular restorative effect. Although this is an isolated case, the authors believe that the biological properties of the cement significantly contributed to this success, which, according to the authors, would have been impossible with allograft or xenogenic bone in granular form and traditional guided bone regeneration techniques.
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.